Talk:United States Air Force/Archive 2

770:

that ARE actively being used on a daily basis, namely the Mi-8 and An-32. There are no redesignations within the tri-service designation system for these aircraft. How do you propose including/excluding them? On top of that, why not include any known, active X-series aircraft? I don't know of any, but if we are testing a new airframe and it has reached production to the point of being in posession of the USAF and being tested, why not include it? They are in the "system," they are manned, and are on the books. We do lots of research on F-15s and F-16s. Many different airframes are being used for testing (i.e. A-10C, some F-15Ds, etc.) Do those units not count? If so, why? They are actively assigned to operational units and are accounted for in the grand totals of manned aircraft for the USAF. Your definition of "operational" seems misguided too. As far as I know, if a unit has orders to exist and has a commander (usually done in , it is "operational." If it is only a detachment of a larger unit, then it is not operational, even though it may have aircraft. Those aircraft, however, would be assigned to the larger unit. There are many operational units that do not all have the same type of aircraft too, though most are testing or training units. By the way, the list already includes several G and Q-series aircraft and IMHO should also include the YAL-1 and any drones we actively use.

4520:. These Armed Forces report directly to the President as their Commander-in-Chief. The top commanders of the Air Force, such as the General in charge of NORAD, the General in charge of the U.S. Air Force in Europe, and the General in charge of the Pacific Air Force, work directly under the President, and thus they do not work for the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of the Air Force - except when authority has been delegated by the President to them. The top commanders of the Air Force, mentioned above, are also not under the command of the Chief of Staff of the Air Force or the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The jobs of these officers, and also of the Secretary of the Air Force and the Secretary of Defense, are to provide the U.S. Air Force with the equipment, personnel, and supplies with which to perform its duties - which are to execute the orders of the President of the United States. 1184:"Headquarters US Air Force (HQ USAF): The senior headquarters of the Air Force, consisting of two major entities: the Secretariat (including the Secretary of the Air Force and the Secretary's principal staff), and the Air Staff, headed by the Chief of Staff, USAF. Major Command (MAJCOM): A major subdivision of the USAF, directly subordinate to Headquarters United States Air Force (HQ USAF). They are assigned a major segment of the Air Force mission and possess the full range of staff functions needed to perform required tasks. Direct Reporting Unit (DRU): A subdivision of the Air Force, directly subordinate to the Chief of Staff. A DRU performs a specialized or restricted mission that does not fit into any of the MAJCOMs. A DRU has many of the same administrative and organizational responsibilities as a MAJCOM." plagarized from 1067:

equal to the Secretary of the Air Forc, thus it's clear that the boxes do not necessarily need to be separate to establish hierarchy. Second, the term "United States Air Force," while not explicitly printed on the chart, is most commonly associated with the uniformed service, not the civilian appartus. On that chart, the uniformed service is represented by the highest ranking uniformed officer, the AF Chief of Staff, and all subordinate commands... all of which are listed below the Secretary of the Air Force. Also, compare the organization for the Air Force Department to the Navy Department. Using your argument that the term for the uniformed service within each department is interchangeable with the name of the department, the Marine Corps could be called the Navy! --

1730:

Airmen fight wars while maintaining a seated position -- whether it's behind a desk, behind the wheel of a vehicle, or inside the cockpit of an ass-kickin' killing machine. The term CHairforce does not define Airmen as weak, harmless, pencil-pushing desk jockeys. Everyone knows U.S. Air Force personnel almost single-handedly won the past two U.S. wars. Whether an Airman has four stars on his shoulder or one stripe on his or her sleeve, whether they're a fighter jock, a grease monkey or a Services troop handing out basketballs at the base gym, CHairforce.com will treat all "bluesuiters" with admiration and respect ... until you prove otherwise, in which case you will be taunted and ridiculed.

1116:

Force" article should be included in this article. Similar disambiguation pages/links should be created for the Army and Navy service branches and their respective civilian departments (if they don't already exist). The Marine Corps article should be edited include a reference to its position in the Navy Department (if needed) but should not be redirected to the Navy Department page; it would be illogical to think a search for "United States Marine Corps" or a derivative would actually seek "Navy Department." This solution will satisfy all points, and thus I propose that this issue be closed once implemented. --

1160:

staff, and direct reporting units. To refer to one's self as "I am in the Air Force" one does not necessarily need to be a serviceman, you can also be a civilian in the Department of Defense who is assigned to an Air Force Unit. The Air Staff is subordinate to the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and serves primarily as an advisory role to the SecAF, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the SecDef/President. De jure, the CSAF has little command authority over troops, but has a large role as far as policy and direction of the Air Force. De facto, the CSAF leads the USAF in conjunction with the SecAF.

1106:

however, they are a component of the Department of the Navy. In short, when one refers to the Air Force or the Army, the distinction is minute and only needs to be clarified in rare cases (the terms are interchangeable). It would be rare for someone to say, "The Air Force wants XYZ," and clarification be needed. In the case of the US Navy and USMC, "Navy" is not so clear-cut. In short, Air Force refers to both the Department of the Air Force as a whole and the US Air Force; rarely does a distinction need to be made. The case of the Navy is a different situation. Anyone else have any thoughts?

661:

tails, into the cargo holds of C-17 Globemaster III transports from Charleston Air Force Base, S.C. The Charleston airlifters delivered the MiGs to the National Air Intelligence Center at Wright-Patterson AFB near Dayton, Ohio. If the NAIC can discover how the Fulcrum works, Air Force pilots might gain an edge if they face the Fulcrum in future combat." In addition, it is no secret that the 6th Special Operations Squadron at Hurlburt Field flies the Mi-8 and An-32. Don't be so hasty in eliminating blocks of text without further research.

685:

removing these planes, I was considering the fact that they are not in active operational usage on much more than a research role. If you would like to provide source material that these planes are in use on more than a research basis, I'd agree that they should be added to the list with citations. Also, in the future, it would be helpful for you to sign your posts on talk pages as its difficult to carry on an intellectual conversation with an anonymous party. Thanks :) --

1738:

Air Force via something other than an official site or press release. Had he quoted the External Links discussion instead of calling it linkspam with an agenda, then I would've left it alone. By calling it spam with an agenda, he disregarded those that serve and contribute to the news on the site (making light of some situations during a very serious war). I'm even curious what he thought the agenda was. Anyhow, some people will want to know, hence this post.

4539:(it’s available online for free, for crying out loud…) before making cocksure mumbo-jumbo claims without providing adequate sources. For one, the Secretary of Defense is in the chain of command, of all the military forces, which makes up the Department of Defense (Army, Marine Corps, Navy and Air Force), as he is the “principal assistant to the President in all matters relating to the Department of Defense”. And second, the ”Department of the Air Force” is not a 346:

buy them until the new ones are in effect. As an airman myself there hot and trap a lot of moisture and there actually discontinuing the ones you show in the picture; so at this moment the new designs are unknown and base specific uniforms are in effect and the standerd white logo basic issues are still in effect. Your American tax dollars at work. (This note was added by 70.185.137.99 in the article. I have moved it here where it is more appropriate).

3653:, in my opinion the significance of an airframe or other piece of AF equipment should be based on capability & contribution, not simply the number in the inventory. For example, there may not be a lot of MILSTAR or DSCS III satellites but the contribution of these systems is significant to the AF and other branches. Similarly the number of B-2s, AC-130, et al, may not be high but their effects and contribution to the AF mission are significant.-- 4459:

up their own information warfare orgs. It would be more accurate to state that USAF is a branch that specializes in aerial warfare, but they by no means have an exclusive role here. Both the Navy and Army have huge airpower branches themselves, as well as missile and rocket programs. The introduction is as inaccurate as saying "the Navy is the branch with ships". The introduction sounds more like a press release than an encyclopedia entry.

3110:

aircrafts but he knows nothing about it. The only thing I was able to find out is that this item is definitely of american origin (confirmed by the royal air-force museum). So I am going to post the picture here and I hope that someone can help me or knows somebody who can. Maybe you can also redirect me to a better place to post this request....I would appreciate your advice! Thanks in advance!

848:(to which the article redirects; I've put that back) are in fact one and the same thing. I'm certainly open to any facts showing that they are different organizations, but I believe there are one and the same, based on the facts in the (stub) article that I replaced with a redirect (e.g., same logo, same legislation creating them, same office in charge - Secretary of the Air Force). 4543:! It is by statute defined as a ”Military Department”, and the United States Air Force and the Air National Guard are integral parts of it. If this were not the case, then why would every Air Force Instruction start with the phrase ”By Order of the Secretary of the Air Force” or why would it on every piece of official stationary stand ”Department of the Air Force”? 1201:

Force" implicitly includes the Department of the Air Force. The distinction lies only in the difference between the civilian leadership and the de jure entity USAF. It is both right and proper to include the SecAF when talking about the Air Force. I think it is best phrased as the article is now. Add a separate part if you wish for the Dept. of the AF

2555:

both men for "systemic issues associated with declining Air Force nuclear mission focus and performance". The forced resignations followed an investigation ordered by Gates into two embarrassing incidents involving nuclear weapons, and were also the culmination of a long-running series of disputes between the Air Force leadership and Gates.

1262:"I'm in the Air Force" can mean either USDAF or USAF. Civilians can use either and still be correct. As stated above, the public generally does not disassociate leadership and an entity, hence "Air Force" is good for either entity. Air Staff is merely the staff of the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and IS a component of the USAF. 3696:

of the three types of heavy bombers operated by the USAF. Whereas the B-1 averages a 53% ready rate, and the B-2 achieved a 26%, the B-52 averages 80% as of 2001." Also, am i the only one who disagrees that the V-22 should remain on this page? There were only 7 of this aircraft with the air force at last census. FYI, there is

323:

hilarious how out of touch with common sense and reality nationalist internet fanboys can be. Go to any source, ask ANYBODY, and they will rightfully say that the USAF is the #1 air force in the world. Americans know it, America's allies know it, and America's enemies know it. But nationalist fanboys apparently don't.

1844:<-- example the offical AF biography of the CSAF, notice his rank history, in vertical order beginning with 2dlt at the top, and gen at the bottom. and its like that with all af individuals, if your in the af and dont believe me, check your rank history in vmpf, youll see. under duty history --: --> 872:

to day operations by the Secratary of the Air Force and his civilian deputies within the Department of the Air Force. Just as the Secretary of the Army is not in the Army, but in the Department of the Army, the Secretary of the Air Force is not in the Air Force, but in the Department of the Air Force.

4150:

This portion of the article states absolutely no references or sources. It sounds to me like someone who works in a fighter squadron is just blathering on and on about something that happens in his particular squadron. (I.E., "The less advertised, but perhaps more important reason for First Friday is

2601:

The fine USAF band program deserves to be mentioned. The Air Force Band began with Glenn Miller in WWII. Today, the USAF has its premier symphonic band based (last I heard) at Bolling Field and a dozen or so subsidiary bands based across the United States and overseas. It also has musical groups that

2554:

On 5 June 2008, in a move called "unprecedented" by one Air Force-related journal, Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, accepted the resignations of both the Secretary of the Air Force, Michael W. Wynne, and the Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force, Gen. T. Michael Moseley, in effect firing

2420:

The listing on of the different MajComs, "Air Force Cyberspace Command" should read "Air Force Cyber Command (Provisional)". Reference for this is a memorandum dated 01 Nov 2006 from CSAF to LtGen Robert Elder, 8AF/CC Titled 'Operational Cyberspace Command "Go Do" Letter'. This memo is available on

2200:

October 20th - The American air force has discharged three colonels, a luitenant-colonel and 66 other men of their posts for a series of mistakes that led a B52-bomber on the 29th of August, armed with six nuclear missiles under ist wings, to fly from North-Dakota to Louisiana. The incident is one of

1564:

Some good points. However, there is a history of USAF article, so there's no need to duplicate that here. I'm not sure about a "Culture section" as these kinds of issure are usually covered on the main page in other armed forces article. That doesn't mean some sections couldn't use some cutting back,

1239:

Thinking about this, perhaps the confusion is that for someone to say "I'm in the Air Force", he/she would need to be servicemember (that is, an uniformed officer or enlisted member). By contrast, a civilian, including the SECAF, would say "I work in the Department of the Air Force". I'm not at all

1159:

This entire discussion of USAF vs USDAF is a bit misleading. The US Air Force falls under the Secretary of the Air Force. The only elements of the Department of the Air Force of which I am aware that do NOT fall under the US Air Force are the SecAF's Staff, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force and his

1105:

Yes, but the terms ARE used (in some cases) interchangably. If someone in the Pentagon states, "The Navy wants more money and it's coming out of my budget!" it could mean either the US Navy proper or the Department of the Navy. The Marine Corps is special and would NOT be mistaken as being "the Navy"

1082:

a department under the Department of the Navy (...it's the mens department, or so the joke goes). If you want to refer to the services by Departments under DoD, there is the Air Force, Army, and Navy (no USMC since it falls under the Navy). If you want to refer to our service BRANCHES, then there are

944:

To be more constructive: I'd settle for something (anything) that says "The USAF, as well as X, Y, and Z, are components of the Department of the Air Force", or "Position X, which heads the USAF, reports to the Secretary of the Air Force". Or an organization chart which shows the USAF and the USDAF

660:

By "units", do you mean squadrons? If so, this is true; we have no MiG-29/Su-27 squadrons. However we have a few. "Of the 21 Fulcrums the United States bought, 14 are the frontline Fulcrum C's...from Oct. 20 to Nov. 2, 1997, loadmasters and aerial port experts squeezed two MiGs apiece, sans wings and

298:

F-22 per-unit costs are actually misleadingly inflated. Basically Congress slashed the production amount, greatly increasing the amount of R&D costs attributed to each plane. And again, what is your source for the claim that the F-22 is "much less maneuverable?" Just about everything out there

252:

If they're so amazing, then how come the F22 (the 'top' USAF fighter) lost out to the Eurofighter Typhoon in testing and training exercises? And the ET was being chased by two F15s but managed to out maneuver and lock onto both of them in another exercise? The only advantage the F22 has over the ET

4855:

Sure, the fundamentalist bug does not stop at the doors of the Air Force Academy. There are plenty of other news stories that cover the stain throughout the USAF. The Schwartz letter is well past due and it simply telling them to cool their jets on the issue. Why not at least cover his action on the

4458:

Except this is at least partly untrue. Who made USAF the "cyberwarfare branch"? No one. Nothing in the National Security Act of 1947, nor any other recent legislation assigns this role to them. This is a role that USAF has tried to monopolize for itself and failed. The Army and Navy are both setting

3632:

bad. I think it could be split into more categories (bombers, fighters, cargo, etc), like its predecessor. In addition, it is missing a large number of aircraft (B-2, C-47T, MC-130W, AC-130H, AC-130U, MC-12, U-28, etc). Most of these were on the previous list and, while pictures aren't available for

3109:

Hi there! I have tried hard to obtain some information on a WWII item we found in eastern germany. As there were no or just negative replies, this is my last try. My friend runs a little museum in eastern germany where this item is displayed next to remainders of american, english, german and french

1773:

display of air force rank is in ascending order, as shown in AF-PAM 36-2241 pg 462 & 463, Display of Military ranks. i believe that is how it should be displayed on wiki as well. think of it this way... if an country displays its flag a certain way, would it be accurate if wiki showed the flag

871:

The United States Air Force is a military service. It has a command structure and a civilian leadership. That civilian leadership is provided in operational matters by the President and the Secretary of Defense and his civilian deputies with the Department of Defense, and in matters other than day

362:

Having a look at the current external links I realize this section is too large, I propose we cut it down to the official sites plus a few very reasonable externals to that. If anyone has any comments about the current linkes and whether they should be kept or not please let me know. I removed two

322:

Less effective, "right." If the F-22 is less effective than the Eurofighter, then are you saying that the USAF spent countless millions on NOTHING? Why are F-22 exports to America's allies banned by law, if America's allies already have a supposedly superior aircraft in the Eurofighter? I find it

221:

It certainly should be cited, but I concur that the USAF is the most technologically advanced air force. That is not to say they are the "best", but that their technology is superior to others. It could be argued that China's Air Force is larger or that Israel's pilots are better, but the technology

3875:

The FY 2010 defense appropriations bill has passed both chambers and is awaiting final passage. In this legislation, there is essential language sponsored by Senator Christopher Bond (R-MO) and Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) that would prevent the Pentagon from retiring many Air National Guard legacy

3767:

I propose that the B-2 be added to the list of aircraft, although they are not used as often as some of the other bombers, they are the most iconic and identifiable bombers ever, and they should not be left off the list. if we have satelites, refueling trucks, and cesna aircraft on this list surely

3721:

This article is actually repeated three times, and each one is slightly different in content and layout. It should probably be combined into one article, and should include every airplane at least listed on the USAF website, regardless of numbers. What constitutes a 'low number' that shouldn't be

3695:

I agree with Ndunruh but the B-2 is not only low in number but is also not used as much, quote: "the stealth of the B-2 Spirit (has) only been useful until enemy air defenses (are) destroyed, a task that has been swiftly achieved in recent conflicts. The B-52 boasts the highest mission capable rate

2939:

was added back in as an operational aircraft for the US Air Force. Included was a comment to read the linked article before deleting. I did read the linked article and did not see where it said that the C-47 was operational within the US Air Force. I did find these 2 items that but I do not read

1749:

Sorry if I offended you. It was late at night, and "linkspam with an agenda" was the best I could coume up with. I looked for the relevant protion of the guidelines today with that phrase, and OF COURSE I couldn't find it! Anyway, from actually looking at the site last night, I don't think the link

1737:

In the future I would suggest to people to sit back and take a look at it first. Hell, even just click on the big Disclaimer on the front page to see what it's about. Those that serve and have served enjoy sites such as the one linked and those that will serve will have a chance to hear about the

1580:

What information does this add to the article? How is it notable? Do we list company ethics codes or values on corporation wiki articles? These values are no different than the values implicit in any military or corporate organization. If the values indicated something you wouldn't expect, this

1551:

This article could use more information about the USAF budget, various bases, and its history. Other areas seem overly detailed: Humanitarian Missions, grade structure, uniforms, core values, and vocations. Overall the article seems to focus too much on the culture of the Air Force and not enough

1066:

Re: your message on my talk page. Read the chart again. First, you'll notice that the boxes "Undersecretary and Assistant Secretaries of the Air Force" and "Chief of Staff Air Force" are both listed below "Secretary of the Air Force." It would be illogical to assume that either of those posts is

887:

2. Just as there are separate articles for the Army and the Department of the Army, so there should be separate articles for the Air Force and the Dpeartment of the Air Force. But I will look through former Department of the Air Force articles to find ones more inofrmative than the one I created.

315:

option for when the Eurofighter would rather not give itself away. Furthermore, the Eurofighter supporter here seems ignorant of the fact that the F-22 was also designed for reduced infrared signature, something that goes back to much older stealth aircraft like the F-117. So not only does PIRATE

157:

Even though other branches don't want to admit it, they know that we are the most technologically advance military air power. I mean its obvious to anyone. Our job is air power, and we are the United States, so of course we are the most technologically advanced and of course its in air power. Every

4401:

When you type Chair Force into the search bar, it redirects you to the United States Air Force page. This is derogatory and disrespectful. Knowledge is not the place to be flaming other services. I would appreciate it if someone who knows how would remove that redirecet. It is no different than if

3026:

I was in the Air Force from Jan.1972 to Aug.1987. I was in a Drug and Alcohol Treatment Program in Lakinheat England in 1981.While in there I saw a movie intitled I Will Quit Tomorrow. That movis got me on the road to recovery. I am now a certified Drug and Alcohol Counselor. And have searched for

345:

ADDED NOTE: The uniforms your talking about or the so called "New PT Uniform" are no longer going to be in service anymore as they failed actual use tests and an optional design is in effect talk about goverment spending gone down hill. By the way those going thru Air Force boot camp are forced to

285:

I've actually researched this claim, and again it appears to be another internet myth repeated by Euro fanboys without any actual support. I actually don't dispute the claim that the ET may be better than the F-15, it better be since it's so much newer. That doesn't really matter though, because

3836:

I'm not aware of any legal precident on the issue, but the National Security Act of 1947 combined with the 'necessary and proper' clause should be sufficient. The Constitution does expressly charge the government to "...provide for the common defense..." In the 21st century that requires an Air

2205:

Alright, the sentence seems a bit off, but that's the best I could do. The original sentence isn't that good altogether... Anyway, has there been such an incident? Any news? Because right now, I'm thinking I should just focus on the English wiki, since the Dutch version seems to be run by idiots.

1329:

Guys, we have to come up with a solution to this info box situation. It seems that every time somebody makes a change, someone else reverts it. I don't really care which info box is at the top of the article, as long as the Air Force Seal is at the top. This is mainly because every other military

855:

find some evidence that the two organizations being separate, please post it one or both talk pages. Also, if you do that, I strongly recommend that you revert the USDAF article to an earlier version of that article: although it was a stub, there was much more information in the previous version

769:

No objection to the "rule," but it seems arbitrary and not consistent with the system the Air Force actually uses. I'll admit that the MiG-29 and Su-27 aren't "on the books" in any active squadron of which I am aware, but I know for a fact that there are several aircraft with Russian designations

695:

Okay, but your definition of "operational" is a bit misleading. What are you saying? Do aircraft flying CONUS mission only not count? Do they have to fly combat? Do they have to be used only for war support? What about training aircraft? These aircraft are as operational as any other. Even though

684:

While I understand your concerns on this issue, possessing planes for research does not mean that these planes are in operational usage. If every plane the USAF used for research was included, the list would have to include a variety of planes which might make the list unwieldy. I was not hastily

132:

I'm surprised that nobody has complained about this statement yet. When viewing the discussion forums on Knowledge for the other branches of the US military, whenever their technological prowess or fighting ability was lauded, the statement was immediately criticized and/or deleted. Such has not

4579:

redirect to this article. The way things are now is just a P.I.A. Also, there is no reason why some other country already has established, or will establish in the future, a Department of the Air Force. For example, that conceivably could happen in Canada, Australia, the United Kingdom, Ireland,

2068:

is called the Tweet officially, but unofficial nicknames include "TWA" (That whiny airplane), "A 7000-pound dog whistle", and "A 7000-pound Air Education Training Command training device which converts fuel to noise". Other examples include the B-52 Stratofortress being called the BUFF (Big Ugly

1725:

I thought I'd clarify a link (www.chairforce.com) that was added by myself and subsequently removed by one BillCJ. There's an Air Force casual site many of you may know of named Chairforce.com run for and by those that are serving and have served. I put it in the External Links section so that

473:

In keeping with the idea that Air Force qualification badges also often serve as awards (e.g., pilot wings, astronaut wings, etc.), I propose that this page's section formerly titled "Common badges" be upgraded to honor the importance of these important Air Force awards. Hence, the new suggested

4733:

the Air Force makes in exercise of its legally defined mission and purpose. Nor is what General Schwartz said even all that different from those defined missions, as stated in our "missions" section of this article. Even the tagline of "fly, fight, and win in air, space, and cyberspace" already

3998:

Further, I think it's time to dump the equipment tables, per the comments in the sections above, and return to a strict list format for the main aircraft (including the B-2) only. Missiles, guns, and ground vehicles can be covered on the euqipment lists pages. Further, I thinnk we shpould avoid

2191:

20 oktober - De Amerikaanse luchtmacht ontheft drie kolonels, een luitenant-kolonel en 66 andere manschappen van hun posten voor een reeks van fouten die maakten dat een B-52-bommenwerper op 29 augustus met zes nucleair geladen kruisraketten onder de vleugels van Noord-Dakota naar Louisiana kon

1729:

THE NAME "CHAIRFORCE.COM" <- credit goes to the site of the same name... Within this Web site (CHairforce.com), the name "Air Force" has, in some instances, been changed to "CHairforce." This is not meant as a disparaging term. It is simply a word used to draw attention to the fact that most

1505:

Lots of changes have been made to this page and some people think it needs to be cleaned up. I for one don't see much of a problem with the page, but I'm new at this. I think that if someone has the time to point out that it isn't "up to standards" then that person should be specific about what

1200:

Mikedelsol is technically correct, but to not add some caveats is misleading. The primary point of contention seems to be proper terminology. USAF is led by the Department of the Air Force. As a whole, the public generally does not disassociate an entity from its leadership, hence the term "Air

1115:

Then a disambiguation page is needed. The term "United States Air Force" should come directly to this article since that term refers most often to the service branch, not the department (and the original edit language should remain deleted). A disambiguation link to the "Department of the Air

310:

Searching the internet I've seen 80-90 miles stated as PIRATE's optimal detection range, with 30-50 miles as a more reasonable number. The advantage of passive systems like PIRATE is that they don't broadcast the Eurofighter's position like radar would - PIRATE is not a trump card but rather a

4515:

The U.S. Air Force and the Department of the Air Force are NOT exactly the same thing, hence, why should Department of the Air Force redirect here? The Department of the Air Force is an administrative civilian agency mostly manned by civilians, and the Secretary of the Air Force reports to the

4332:

I'm sure it's accurate informaiton (although I notice it isn't actually cited on the page). However, the United States Air Force page is very high-level. The most detailed the page gets is simply listing out the Major Commands and the Numbered Air Forces (and equilivants), not even providing

3802:

The US Constitution explicitly authorizes the Armies, the National Guard and Navies. The Coast Guard can be extrapolated as another Navy, but there is no particular authority for the Air Force. The Air Force was originally part of the Army, but since splitting off, has anyone ever published

4775:

One assumes you'll enlighten your fellow editors with context, links, etc.? I'd further remind you that as with a past news story your added to an article regarding the Secretary of Defense, the involvement of Schwartz doesn't make something notable. It isn't that Schwartz isn't notable, his

1733:

It was tagged as linkspam with an agenda (which does not appear in WP:EL btw) by a BillCJ. I read through the talk section (this) and realized that the External Links section had been crowded and chosen for reduction. Had I known this I would have removed it myself (I should have check the

2654:

D = Not manned device (remote controlled) E = Electronic warfare H = Search and Rescue K = Tanker L = Cold weather operations M = Permanently modified N = Designed for special tests Q = Not manned device R = Recognition V = VIP transport W = Weather recognition Y = Service tests Z = Project

253:

is stealth - it costs thrice as much and is much less maneuverable. However, with the PIRATE detection system the stealth is completely useless. So the height of USAF technology is effectively three times as much as the European fighter, yet less effective. Right. Best in the world.

4060:. I've not attempted to combine any information from the variaous tables, as I don't work well with tables. Feel free to update the current tables as necessary, but any new article should be discussed first. We certainly didn't need 3-4 pages covering basically the same information. - 4473:

You are correct. The cyberwarfare mission is a joint operation. The Joint Cyber Analysis Course at Corry Station, FL, (the current entry level military cyberwarfare training) trains members from Army, Navy, Marine, Air Force, Coast Guard, and the Department of Homeland Security.

1167:"The National Security Act of 1947 became law on July 26, 1947. It created the Department of the Air Force, headed by a Secretary of the Air Force. Under the Department of the Air Force, the act established the United States Air Force, headed by the Chief of Staff, USAF." source 613:

I was wondering if anyone could add this. There's probably some official method somewhere to ask, but I don't feel like looking around right now. I know that you have to be off all medications for at least a year and there are weight requirements, but otherwise, I have no clue.

2490:. As a non-native English speaker, I would appreciate any help in correcting language errors and comments on factual accuracy. Thank you very much and I hope it makes for an interesting reading. You can remove this section after enough people have contributed to "my" article 4706:

Schwartz said the Air Force's core contributions reside in four main areas: control and exploitation of the air and space domains, as well as mission assurance in cyberspace; global strike; rapid global mobility; and worldwide intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance.

793:

The top of this article is a little bit to cluutered and confusing graphicly. I will not have the time, but could someone please fix this up a little bit? Move the info boxes, pictures or content boxes around a little so they are not all clustered in one spot Thank you.

3928:

A better question is: why do we need aircraft on the Vehivcles article when we already have a list of aircraft of the USAF article? That's redundant. We certainly don't need two ariclies listng the same things, and probably 2-3 templates listing the same things too. -

1784:

Agreed. Every Navy and Marine Corps publication I recall being issued, reading, or owning also displays ranks and rates in ascending order. I left the service several years ago so my memory could be wrong but it is unusual for me to see them displayed otherwise.

1516:

Firstly, instead of just attaching a cleanup tag based on what "some people think," it would be wiser to judge the state of the article itself and make any improvements based upon what you think should be done as observed from Knowledge's standards. An article like

2016:

The link of the source given there is dead. Elsewhere in the text, it says 6 F-117s were retired in March, but makes no metion of the rest of the fleet. I'm assuming the person who added the reirement and decommissioning date thought it meant the whole fleet. -

3999:

duplication, and only list equipment and missiles on one page, and possibly not the same one. A list of USAF aircraft page with a full table is OK, as most of the other air force pages have that, and it can list all the USAF aircraft in inventory. Thoughts? -

1536:

Can someone familiar with this topic and this article please shorten the lead? It's way too long. Typically, it's pretty easy to just move much of the material into new or existing sections but I don't feel comfortable doing that myself on this article.

1734:

discussion area first), which clarifies the reason for the External Links section being small. If you serve, previously served, thinking about serving, then the site is a good place to hear from those at home and abroad and share some laughs with them.

726:

include any manned "X" aircraft that are being actively tested by the Air Force. While the X-15 is not currently in use and the X-43 is unmanned, why not include them. It seems a bit arbitrary. Not all aircraft used by the Air Force fall neatly into the

2165:

Then there's the case of the aircraft that had no official nickname during its entire operational history, only to have its unofficial nickname bestowed upon it at its retirement as its official nickname: F-111 Aardvark.--Buckboard 19:21, 2 April 2008

2508:

I've undertaken the task--it's actually quite well-done--with some tweaking a few additions to flesh out when, how and why the Mirage III was added to Swiss service. I will work on the first half of the article and welcome anyone else to improve my

905:

I just accessed, "Congress, in 1947, established a civilian, Cabinet-level Secretary of Defense to oversee an also newly created National Military Establishment. The U.S. Air Force was also created, along with a new Department of the Air Force."

3782:

Probably not neccessary since there is a more descriptive article at Equipment of the U.S. Air Force. I think that the U-2 should be removed from this article since there are only 28 and it is to be replaced by the RQ-4 Global Hawk by 2012.

3988:

An IP added the B-2 to the aircraft table, and Username1 removed it without comment. I've readded it, as the B-2 is a major USAF asset (and an expensive one), and should be listed in any list of USAF aircraft, regardless of how many were

2972:

The second one says that C-47s are operational in civil airline use, but it does not talk about use within the US Air Force. I am removing C-47 from the list of active aircraft. If I missed something in the article please explain here.

2893:"...A definitive agreement between air force Secretary Finletter and Army Secretary Pace on November 4, 1952, established a fixed wing weight limit of five thousand pounds empty, but weight restrictions on helicopters were eliminated..." 4648:

1. A citation is needed for where it says Civil Air Patrol does 60% of Search and Rescues, last I checked it was more, unless the one listed is a slightly different statistic 2. Should the number of CAP members be listed under size as

4247:

I'm not quite sure this is the proper place to post this. However, I believe in good faith, that someone should do a little more research about the Air Force's colors. I'm pretty sure they are silver and blue, not blue and yellow. --

4298:

I'm not sure this is the right place for the Rapid Capabilities Office section, seems a little to 'in the weeds' to me. Maybe the Air Staff page or an as yet uncreated Office of the Secretary of the Air Force page would be better.

1895:

Once again, the section detailing the symbols worn to demonstrate rank has exploded to 2-3 pages in length. In the grand scheme of things, this is not very important, and the entire insignia section can be relegated to a sub-page.

1811:

Just out of curiousity, what order is used in a vertical chart? I have usually seen General listed at the top of the chart and First Lieutenant at the bottom in other publications. Is that considered the norm on a vertical chart? -

4734:

covers virtually all of those except for rapid mobility. Rapid mobility isn't as sexy for a tagline, but the work of the Air Mobility Command and its ancestors has been core to the Air Force's mission since day one, such as in the

1552:

on its overall role in the US and the world. I was thinking I'd try to reduce and compile some of these sections into a "Air Force culture" section or something similar. Does anyone have any counter-proposals or other thoughts?

3449:

Is it possible for this page to have a list of aircraft that were in active service at the end of the Cold War? I was interested and trying to compare such a list (if it exists elsewhere) with the Soviet list of active aircraft

3092:

By what type of aircraft? Strategic? Should probably distinguish between the types of aircraft, because by strategic ones, russian is largest and in fact newer than that of US. Special:Contributions/99.231.50.118|99.231.50.118]]

268:

Yet the Typhoon was rejected by Singapore, and its radar is one of the most detectable in the world. EVERY system has its pluses and minuses and yours on the F-22 is a distinctly minority opinion.--Buckboard 19:37, 2 April 2008

2767:

It is a rare and notable event in AF history for both AF secretary and AF chief of staff being fired at the same time. Cut back the content, sure. This article really needs a history section. That's all in the 'lead' now.

1880:

it was just another example of how rank is displayed, in case someone else may have had a question after seeing rank displayed in this manner. same as how someone had a question when they saw it displayed in another way.

305:

This is such ridiculously ignorant nationalist boasting. PIRATE is not some kind of magic super-sensor that easily renders billions of dollars in stealth technology useless. PIRATE is a passive infrared detection system,

2647:

A = Attack or tactical support B = Bomber C = Transport E = Electronic airplane F = Fighter H = Helicopter O = Observation P = Patrol S = Anti-submarine Warfare (ASW) T = Trainer U = Utilitarian V = Vtol X = Experimental

4223: 4013:

Seems reasonable. Currently the equipment section takes up about a quarter to a third of the article, that seems a bit excessive for an overview article when the equipment can, and has, been broken out into independent

548:

Separated the two major DRUs from the MAJCOMs. AFDW and ANG are not considered MAJCOMs and do not hold MAJCOM status within the Air Force. DRUs are units with missions similar to MAJCOMs but more limited in scope.

3239: 1837:

in an organizational chart the rank order would be descending to show position of the individual. however when a rank history for an individual is diplayed, low ranks are at the top and higher ranks at the bottom.

1278: 773:

In short, I think that we need to include any manned aircraft or significant unmanned aircraft that are actively assigned to an Air Force unit. If it can be verified as to what unit it is assigned, then it should be

3722:

included? I'm not trying to pick a fight ( I think who ever reorganized the article did an excellent job), I just think we need to streamline to one article and include all airplanes(Fixed,Rotary and Tilt wing).

1026:

shows the DoD org chart. The most accurate description is to say that the USAF is an element of the Department of the Air Force, which itself is a subordinate division of the cabinet-level Department of Defense.

2103:

on the T-43, and there's no mention of the word Gator, period. As far as I know, the T-43 has NO official name. There is a PDF list of DOD designations on a DOD site, but I don't have a link to the latest one. -

4679:

I didn't realize that so many eligible Air Force colonels were declining to be considered for command that the Air Force chief, Norton Schwartz, issued a letter in 2009 saying that henceforth everyone would be

4516:

Secretary of Defense, and hence to the President as a member of the President's cabinet. The U.S. Air Force, on the other hand, is a military organization, with millions of military people, that is a part the

1285:'s idea). Would it be prudent to link that article to the section dealing with this subject, and possibly combine the information into the new article, or would it be better to merge into the USAF article? 4151:

that it forces squadron members to actually clean out the refrigerators, get rid of the trash, and make their place of work more habitable for humans lest they face the wrath of their significant others.")

4337:

page than on the United States Air Force page. If we begin listing all the components of the Air Force headquarters on this page it can get very detailed and a reader may lose the 'big picture' of the Air

2696: 2399:

They have some Canadian DHC-6 Twin Otter for training purposes. The C.29 calibration and light transport jet is a British design (Bae 125). Both are mentioned. The IAI Kfir was used by the US Navy/Marines

2796:

I agree, but this should not be placed at the top of the article; bad formatting. If you be placed in it's own subcategory under "History"; possibly under "Current events" or something along that lines.

2580:

The firings paragraph does not seem that out of place. It is current info like the reduction in force effort. It probably should be shortened. Where should that info go if removed from this article?

4048:

I've finally removed the long tables from the articel per the consensus here, and restored the older text-based setion that actually describes what the various types of aircraft do. I've created a new

3803:

anything explaining how the Air Force is authorized under the Constitution? I'm pretty certain the Air Force is here to stay, but it would be useful for an explanation to be made part of the article.

4333:

detailed descriptions of those units. My understanding of the Rapid Capabilities Office is that it's part of the Air Staff and as such a full description of the office is probably better located in

605:

I think someone should add this to the uniforms since they are soon to be issued to members deploying in the next set of AEF's and going to be issued to trainees at Basic Training at Lackland AFB.

199:

Yes, it sounds arrogant, and it is also probably true. But that is not what wikipedia is about. The writer's opinion, even though likely true, is irrelevant. If there is a reliable source, like

4173:

Sorry didnt see this comment before I deleted the section, I just noticed it had been tagged as unreferenced for over two years. But it didnt appear to be notable to what is an overview article.

2700: 2260: 728: 710: 706: 498:

Most enlisted members do not attend/graduate college before joining. Also there are fewer officers then enlisted. The enlisted folks also tend to be the more hands on members of the force.

4279:

How about redoing the lead with the core functions on top in the USAF terms, but hyperlinked to what those terms actually mean? Perhaps this could link to or replace the missions section?

1752:

This page in a nutshell: Adding external links can be a service to our readers, but they should be kept to a minimum of those that are meritable, accessible and appropriate to the article

3675:

The equipment table in this article repeats most of what is in the Equipment article. I think the table in this article should be replaced with a text summary or some type of summary. -

929:

The U.S. Army Air Forces were completely separated from the U.S. Army, and the separation included creating a department-level organization equal to that of the Army to run the Air Force

4224:

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/awst/2010/03/29/AW_03_29_2010_p56-210646.xml&headline=USAF%20Grooms%20Teenage%20Computer%20Geeks

3378:

All reports I've seen so far on the USAF cuts have been based on that one Bloomberg article, but as soon as I get an independent second source I'll revert that section back into place.

3318: 3179:

Any value to including a section here about the Civil Air Patrol (other than the "see also") similar to that of the US Coast Guard Auxiliary included in the Coast Guard article (see

4130:

I'd sugest putting in the combat command article. It's more a combat command role rather than a service branch role and it's not necessarily always filled by an Air Force officer--

1333:

I swapped the pics so that the airplane picture was located in the USAF template. Apparently someone has reverted that also so that the seal appears in it. Now we have two seals...

1235:

Looking at the DoD organizational chart, are the under secretary and assistant secretaries of the Air Force considered to be part of the USAF, or are they outside of/above the USAF?

2259:

They have a large number of one-off and experimental aircraft as well as captured and otherwise acquired foreign aircraft that are not operational aircraft and are not part of the

1045:- in fact, it doesn't appear anywhere on the chart. Rather, "Air Force Major Commands and Agencies" report to the box titled "Department of the Air Force", with nothing inbetween. 363:

links today that were just added yesterday because one of them was refering to a chinese defense or something along those lines, nothing to do with USAF in the title of the link.

4824:, and why it is notable (particularly notable to an article about the entire Air Force, and not just a single command or section of it). Just as a story does not become notable 3238:

I think it would be appropriate to include a short section, but I have a hard time justifying where to put it in the current article's structure. It's already mentioned in the

92:

The USAF website confirms this is the "USAF" roundel (as oposed to some other service), but it is fairly common on USMC ans US Navy planes and helicopters. Can anyone explain?

3335:

I'd say no, it doesn't add anything to the USAF site. An RFI is a publication to the commercial sector and therefore not really applicaple to most of the potential readers.--

2558:

This is an information article about the USAF, not a current events page. While the above quote is ture, and yes, this did happen, it has no business being in this article.

1632:. I recommend moving that page to the proposed new article, and then adding in the new info. That way you keep the history of the ABU page, and not just make it a redirect. - 2622: 4913: 286:

the F-22 is also better than the F-15, but by a whole lot more (numerous sources stating that F-22s have beaten F-15s with ridiculous odds like 8:1 against the F-22).

222:

on which both countries' air forces are based came after U.S. advances in technology. Either way, this still needs a source. Until a source is provided, a tag (i.e.

3251: 2334:

Yeh im actully talking about the russian MIG-29 , I believe since the early years of Cold War and the USAF trying to simulate such technology rather than Buy them.

3898: 1358: 279:

No proof was provided to back up this bold claim. Furthermore, so many sources support the F-22's supremacy to the point that it's #1 status is common knowledge.

2969:

The first one says they were still operational during the Vietnam war, but since that ended over 30 years ago, it does not say that they are operational today.

2899: 1506:

should be cleaned up; kind of a drive-by insult to those of use working on the page. IMHO, I'd be happy to help, but I need guidance on exactly what is wrong.

571:"Un Ab Alto" most definitely does not mean "One Over All". It appears to be a bastardized French-Latin mixtrure, with basic meaning "One out of the depths". 563:

The ABU is nothing like the MARPAT. It was designed from the ground up by Tiger Stripe for the Air Force. It is also based on a different camouflage concept.

4407: 1437:

and have their service's seals. I think there is good information in the infobox that is currently in the article. Perhaps the solution could be to have

1794:

I agree as well, I'm in the Air Force, and i believe it should be in ascending order. Robkehr, you stated something that I makes sense with the flag.--

2089:

so does the DOD have a list of official names? and why do AF websites and AF article refer to the T-43 as the T-43 Gator if its not the official name?

4576: 1244: 833: 805: 3947:

And despite being on numerous lists the aircraft info is still duplicated in this article, when really it should just have a link out and a summary.

3319:

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=9989409add711616230dced09861a253&tab=core&tabmode=list&cck=1&au=&ck=

3056:

I've never edited before but I cannot find it in the edit page. Whoever knows how to change it... can you correct the Vice Chief of Staff to General

4057: 4033:

I've decided to treat Air Force Academy aircraft as Air force aircraft since I've read that the academy is an agent of the Depart. of the air force.

1225: 1037:

Thank you for the link to the DoD organization chart. Unfortunately, the chart does not show what you stated in your posting on my talk page - that

812:(Note: I'm collecting discussions from three user talk pages (my mistake not starting the conversation here); participation by all is invited. -- 650:

I removed references to two Russian Aircraft (SU-27 and Mig 29) which the USAF may own specimens of but has not fielded (currently)active units. --

488:

What are the advantages of Enlisted and Officers? Why would someone choose to join as enlisted when they can attain much higher rank as an officer?

4053: 3910: 1870:

I appreciate the example but I don't think it (a chronological listing of an individual's promotional record) is applicable to this situation. --

664: 299:

says that the F-22 not only has excellent maneuverability, but can capably maneuver at a ceiling of 60,000 ft, something other fighters cannot do.

169:

If someone can find a study proving the USAF to be the most advanced all that then I won't complain, but otherwise.. it's just POV... an opinion.

3355:

What's old is new again as USAF resdiscovers it's old role as a COIN force. Now what's needed is a USAF COIN page to tie together articles like

2337:

Anyways , Just one more question ; About the Irani F14s , How they get their spare parts if they are in conflict with the manufacturer country ?

2069:

Flying Fucker), the B-1B Lancer being called the Bone (getting the B-1 is considered getting Boned), and the F-16 Falcon being called the Viper.

3430:

Isn't Wideawake airfield considered a USAF base although it is shared by The Royal Air Force? Because I could not find it in any USAF articles.

4720: 3492: 756:

an official designation in the tri-service designation system should be the criteria for inclusion here. But I'm open to discussion on this.--

2988:

Seems like there was a story about a C-47 that was restored by Air Force personal or something AF related. But that is not active service. -

1601:

In the interests of keeping the article to a reasonable size, I suggest that the information on USAF uniforms is moved to a new article like

3701: 2602:

perform in various other genres. These groups make a significant contribution to Air Force life, morale, recruitment, and public relations.

320:

So the height of USAF technology is effectively three times as much as the European fighter, yet less effective. Right. Best in the world.

4455:

The introduction to the article states: "The United States Air Force (USAF) is the aerial warfare, space warfare, and cyberwarfare branch"

3160: 2851: 1316: 3749:, etc). The composite article should include every airframe and variant in active service. This article should include them in list form. 3220:

part of the USAF as the official, congressionally-chartered civilian auxiliary. But, I understand you point. Thanks for the thoughts.

2621:

Greetings. Does anyone have a summary of USAF units in Afghanistan/supporting ops in Afghanistan in 2008? I want to update this section…

1683:

Does a current inventory of the USAF exists on wikipedia? (with the exact number of the aircraft). If yes, where can I find it?Cheers, --

4655: 4634: 4596: 4592: 4521: 4475: 3574: 2744:

While their firing effected the Air Force, this statment does not directly pertain to the Air Force as a whole; it directly pertains to

2565: 668: 254: 185: 4536: 4496:

Can we have a small section about USAF research programs, including all of the projects that have flown from NASA to nest with USAF?

4436: 4158: 3515:

Uh, you essentially agreed with me as I said "this article". The History article is a fitting place for Cold War info such as that. -

3455: 2243:

Does the USAF own any foreign made air crafts such as Mig or Mirage or any others ? if yes , shouldn't be included into the article ?

1582: 324: 2965:

Postwar, thousands of surplus C-47s were sold and overhauled and modified for civil airline use, some remaining in operation in 2009.

1521:

is in much more need of a cleanup. Other than the size of the article itself (which has already been pointed out) it is in OK shape.

3128: 1452: 3269: 2360:

Note: Please remeber that talk pages are not general discussion forums or topic forums, but are to be used for improving artilces.

1957:)? I noticed the information creep a few weeks back, but (slapping head with 2x4) didn't do anything about it at the time.... - 4568: 3037: 4859:

And here's another bit of history between the 2005 lawsuit and the current troubles, that is not currently covered in Wikistan.

1217:

In this article, in the "Organization" section, there are subsections for SECAF and Air Staff. Is that wrong - should these be

3902: 3548: 3076: 2811:

Some section like that, sure. Update: moved that paragraph and the reduction in force paragraph to a Recent history section. -

1602: 2277:...however, some do and have been included. The 6th Special Operations Squadron (and yes, this is all unclassified) flies the 4888:

O'Rourke, G.G, CAPT USN (July 1968). "Of Hosenoses, Stoofs, and Lefthanded Spads". United States Naval Institute Proceedings.

4615: 4049: 2487: 1401: 184:

That's a bit of an arrogant opinion. 'We're the USA, so we is da best'. Since when did anyone but Americans believe that?

3819: 3454:. Such a list would be very informative. Perhaps such a page for the USAF exists elsewhere? I haven't found it however. -- 2450: 1353:

template is that it is used in several other article, where that Desert Storm image would not really be appropriate, like

115:

I think that "USAF Roundel" Refers to it being Roundel used by the USAF, not that the USAF is the only service to use it.

4402:

you typed in the word "nigger" into the search bar and it redirected you to the African American Knowledge page. Thanks.

2064:

An official nickname is authorized by the Secretary of the Air Force as the given name for an airframe. For example, the

739:

That is exactly my point. Those "X" and "Y" aircraft are only flown by test pilots, and not operational units. But all

17: 4862: 2782:

Also, the issue with the nuclear mission is covered there as well. That directly pertains to the Air Force, I think. -

2039:

yea i think they are simply in the process of retiring them, it has not finished yet. they will be replaced with f22's.

1240:

sure how to make that clear. Does anyone else think that point does in fact need to be made somewhere in the article?

50:

I will post a photo in June when I get back from my deployment if no one has done so by then. Is there an article on "

4729:

of the Air Force as defined in law, something a general can't change on his own anyways. It does not discuss the core

4564: 4192: 3247: 1930:

It was, but a lot of the information from those sub-pages had been copied verbatim back onto this page. A real mess.

461:

Is the level of depth in the sections of this article necessary? Could we break out some the info into other articles?

1447:

accept an optional parameter to override the image with an alternate image, and only use that alternate image in the

4572: 3704:. I'm not sure i agree with a text summary however yesterday i tried (but failed) to combine all 3 tables into one. 2673:

is a tanker transport and is the one hundred thirty five project and is the eighteen developed model of the series.

743:

aircraft do fall neatly into the tri-service designation system. Test and operational are two different things. --

451:

I've noticed that this article has been growing steadily for a while now. There are, especially, a lot of pictures.

4588: 1615:

Concur, tho we need to research carefully to make sure such an article doesn't already exist under another name. -

1354: 1092:

That's exactly what I said. The Navy and Marine Corps are not synonymous despite being in the Navy Department. --

283:

And the ET was being chased by two F15s but managed to out maneuver and lock onto both of them in another exercise?

4760:

Ouch! That's harsh. He saw something was busted in the Air Force culture and tried to fix it and we'll ignore it?

1978:

The F-117 is no longer part of the Air Force - it has been retired ans as such should be removed from the gallery

4379: 4334: 3906: 3180: 2978: 1411: 1281:

specifically dealing with the organizational structure of the Air Force (although to be honest it was originally

200: 2676:

Observation: I don't know all the codes because today they created more codes to describe the new USAF devices.

2435:

I edited it from "one of the most largested airforces" to "the largest". The USAF is the largest in the world.

1664:

It might be better to keep the ABU page separate as it appears to be detailed enough to warrent its own article.

277:

how come the F22 (the 'top' USAF fighter) lost out to the Eurofighter Typhoon in testing and training exercises?

4841: 4793: 4743: 2847: 1312: 1253: 1144: 1055: 951: 862: 818: 111:

Moreover, no service has its "own" insignia (the US term of reference).--Buckboard 18:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

3198:

I would vote 'no' because the CAP isn't technically part of the USAF. That's my two, admittedly bias, cents.

3164: 2263:. Many of them are probably secret and do not have verifiable references, so they can't be included here. -- 1464:

That seems a bit over-complicated. I suggest taking one of these two routes: 1. Simply swap the boxes so that

4711:

They've changed focus again? Shall we rewrite or wait five minutes for the list to change to something else?

4479: 1986: 4659: 4630: 4600: 4525: 4038: 3918: 3788: 3727: 3709: 3585: 3459: 3413: 3094: 2569: 2027: 1448: 1421: 845: 672: 328: 258: 189: 2426: 2217: 2183:

Knowledge there was some news, about a few people who didn't follow procedure and got fired. There isn't a

1041:. If that was the case, I would expect to find the USAF and the USDAF in separate boxes. But the USAF is 4440: 4162: 3611: 3470: 3243: 3041: 2723: 2684: 1758:. I have no problem soliciting other opinions here, and if the consensus is to include it, that's fine. - 882:

1. The USAF and the Department of the Air Force are not the smae entity; hence I edited the USAF article.

722:

Then you would be excluding many foreign aircraft, not the least of which are the An-32 and Mi-8. And why

4652:

330,159 active personnel 68,872 reserve personnel 94,597 air guard personnel --,--- auxillary personnel

4249: 2843: 2703:(current system with details). R = Reconnaissance, Y = Prototype, etc (see Tri-Service page for more). - 1308: 4893: 4626: 4611: 4584: 4419: 4178: 4034: 3952: 3914: 3876:

fighter aircraft before there is a viable plan to replace them with a sufficient number of new fighters.

3784: 3705: 3581: 3302: 3132: 3057: 2658:

And the digits after the prefix are the project number and the last word is the developed model number.

2375:; it's really a good question for the F-14 page. There is a mention of this in the last 2 paragraphs at 2127: 1684: 1629: 508:

What about differences between their salaries? Would a Lieutenant earn more money than a Sergeant Major?

3551:. Please do not delete until such time as the aircraft is retired from service or is no longer in use. 3027:

that movie to no end but have not located it. Could someone assist me in locating the movie,(VHS,DVD).

2192:

vliegen. Het incident is een van de ernstigste schendingen van kernwapenprocedures in tientallen jaren.

1474:

is at the top, or 2. Consolidate all information into the other infobox while discontinuing the use of

316:

see less than regular old radar, but I seriously doubt it would pick up the F-22 even at closer ranges.

116: 4673: 4259: 2422: 4622: 4432: 4154: 3499: 3435: 3156: 3124: 3064: 3033: 3017: 2974: 2839: 2561: 2534: 2516: 2438: 1742: 1304: 55: 2105: 628:

The opening paragraph of this article has numbers of active duty and reserve members and ends with "

292:

That's a pretty BIG advantage. That one advantage is easily the deciding factor in BVR engagements.

4837: 4789: 4739: 4460: 4323: 3405: 3072: 2670: 2497: 2368: 2187:

source for this news on Dutch news websites, nor on any (news) channel. This was the actual part:

1478: 1468: 1441: 1431: 1383: 1347: 1249: 1140: 1051: 947: 858: 814: 134: 4357: 3750: 3634: 3552: 2442: 2288: 2221: 2141: 2090: 2071: 2055: 1991: 1882: 1860: 1846: 1775: 1507: 1263: 1202: 1188: 1128: 1107: 1084: 775: 731: 697: 233: 4464: 4315: 4200: 3973: 3827: 3769: 3723: 3680: 3601: 3520: 3482: 3424: 3409: 3265: 3225: 3188: 3114: 2993: 2869: 2816: 2787: 2773: 2749: 2737: 2708: 2586: 2470: 2321: 1394: 1390: 204: 174: 4875: 4845: 4815: 4797: 4769: 4747: 4693: 4663: 4604: 4552: 4529: 4505: 4483: 4468: 4444: 4423: 4391: 4368: 4347: 4327: 4308: 4288: 4268: 4252: 4237: 4204: 4182: 4166: 4139: 4124: 4104: 4089: 4069: 4042: 4023: 4008: 3977: 3938: 3922: 3888: 3846: 3831: 3812: 3792: 3777: 3761: 3731: 3713: 3684: 3662: 3645: 3623: 3605: 3563: 3524: 3502: 3486: 3463: 3439: 3417: 3387: 3368: 3344: 3329: 3306: 3291: 3229: 3207: 3192: 3168: 3136: 3098: 3080: 3045: 3021: 2997: 2982: 2925: 2873: 2820: 2806: 2791: 2777: 2761: 2727: 2712: 2688: 2634: 2611: 2590: 2573: 2538: 2520: 2501: 2474: 2454: 2430: 2421:

the AF Portal. I have tried to change it myself, but cannot find the textbox on the edit page.

2409: 2388: 2347: 2325: 2299: 2272: 2253: 2232: 2210: 2152: 2131: 2108: 2093: 2083: 2058: 2034: 2021: 2003: 1961: 1936: 1925: 1912: 1902: 1885: 1874: 1863: 1849: 1825: 1816: 1798: 1789: 1778: 1762: 1715: 1687: 1668: 1651: 1636: 1619: 1609: 1591: 1569: 1558: 1541: 1525: 1510: 1488: 1459: 1374: 1365: 1337: 1295: 1266: 1256: 1205: 1191: 1147: 1131: 1120: 1110: 1096: 1087: 1071: 1058: 1031: 1004: 979: 954: 910: 892: 865: 821: 798: 778: 760: 747: 734: 717: 700: 689: 676: 654: 640: 618: 595: 575: 553: 535: 526: 512: 502: 492: 478: 433: 352: 332: 262: 244: 216: 193: 178: 162: 151: 137: 119: 105: 96: 79: 66: 44: 4725:

You can drop the sarcasm. No, there is nothing here to change. Our article discusses the legal

4195:

a couple of months ago with the old tag. Someone can add it back with a reference if needed. -

3869: 2486:

Hello dear colleagues, yesterday I've translated the World War II and the Cold War sections of

1288:

In other words, should I keep the new article, or merge the information into the USAF article?

93: 4517: 4410:

and the article deleted, it has since been recreated perhaps you need to nominate it again at

4387: 4343: 4304: 4261: 4135: 4019: 3842: 3658: 3619: 3474: 3398: 3340: 3203: 2802: 2757: 2719: 2680: 2630: 2462: 2446: 2405: 2338: 2244: 1518: 705:

I think operational aircraft would be an aircraft that has been assigned an identifier in the

475: 4493:

The USAF is the most techie military organization, but this gets scant mention on this page.

1855:

Another take on this is that you ascend in rank, not descend (unless you get in trouble.) --

1703: 696:

they are used exclusively for research, they are still part of the inventory "on the books."

4548: 4415: 4174: 4100: 4065: 4004: 3948: 3934: 3773: 3298: 2745: 2733: 2384: 2372: 2268: 2123: 2116: 1958: 1922: 1292: 633: 439: 415: 212: 129:"The USAF is widely considered to be the most technologically advanced military air power." 3147:

i have added the usaf subdivisions in a manner like the one found on the us army wiki page

1955:

I want this in the main article and I'm going to put it there no matter what consensus says

4906: 4871: 4811: 4765: 4716: 4689: 4501: 4284: 4233: 4120: 4085: 3884: 3808: 3496: 3431: 3393:

OK, consider though that Knowledge is not about plans or projections, but rather what has

3383: 3364: 3325: 3287: 3013: 2921: 2607: 2530: 2512: 2364: 2207: 1931: 1897: 1856: 1795: 1586: 1553: 1522: 976: 907: 889: 592: 397: 4703: 1023: 4820:

Again, please provide links and some sort of context for your comments. Try to actually

3855:

It says a Navy and Armies. The Force is just one of those several armies allowed. -HJC

1232:? (That seems a bit different from saying that the USAF is a "component" of the USDAF.) 207:, that says it is the case, then we should cite it. Otherwise it should be removed. -- 72: 35: 4735: 4356:

to be reworded...) and that it would better belong in another place such as air staff.

4319: 4115:

Should JFACC be split off by itself or as part of a combined "combat command" article?

3633:

all of them, they should be the basis for the current list, not starting from scratch.

3544: 3356: 3068: 2662: 2493: 2313: 2286: 2180: 1665: 1648: 1606: 1185: 757: 686: 651: 349: 59: 1726:

people could see some of the funnier moments of being blue. From the website itself:

972: 519: 403: 4411: 4196: 3969: 3823: 3676: 3597: 3593: 3516: 3478: 3261: 3221: 3184: 2989: 2865: 2861: 2812: 2783: 2769: 2704: 2666: 2582: 2466: 2317: 1647:

Likewise, I did not find any other articles on USAF uniforms apart from the ABU one.

572: 532: 523: 509: 499: 489: 226: 170: 39: 4863:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/09/AR2006020902211.html

4567:

redirects to this article, which I consider to be dubious, then so should the terms

4352:

I'd concur that it needs to be cited (it certainly is PD information and it doesn't

3737:

I have to agree. There are many unique aircraft that the Air Force only has one of (

2669:

is a recognition transport and is the one hundred thirty five project. Example: The

2100: 1300:

Usaf, Turkısh Air Force and Israel Air Force doing a new project about F-17Taı-gw19

4383: 4339: 4300: 4131: 4015: 3838: 3654: 3615: 3336: 3199: 2945: 2798: 2753: 2626: 2401: 2031: 1871: 1822: 1786: 1755: 1538: 1485: 1371: 1334: 925:

The U.S. Air Force was also created, along with a new Department of the Air Force."

795: 159: 76: 2665:

is a permanently modified helicopter and is the fifty three project. Example: The

4258:

Blue and yellow are the official air force colours according to the reference at

1581:

might be notable. Maybe this information would be notable in the context of the

1565:

especially if there are articles already on the subject (grads, for instance). -

4544: 4096: 4061: 4000: 3930: 2957: 2380: 2376: 2264: 2018: 1909: 1813: 1759: 1633: 1616: 1566: 1456: 1362: 1230:

is responsible for running the day-to-day affairs of the United States Air Force

1117: 1093: 1068: 1028: 1001: 753: 744: 714: 637: 615: 208: 148: 75:

in the article. This thread should really continue on that article's talk page.

63: 3866:

I'm waiting for the bill to be signed to add this latest wrinkle in the story:

1168: 923:

I suppose I'm coming across as difficult here; if so, I apologize. I read the

4867: 4807: 4761: 4712: 4685: 4497: 4280: 4229: 4116: 4081: 3880: 3804: 3379: 3360: 3321: 3283: 2940:

them to mean that their are currently any C-47s operation in the US Air Force

2917: 2603: 2065: 1282: 583:

means "death from on high"; it was a motto of the Army air corps. Dunno about

550: 2944:

The US Air Force continued to use the C-47 for various roles, including the

1841: 1247:

doesn't have a wikilink to this article; would someone mind adding that? --

303:

However, with the PIRATE detection system the stealth is completely useless.

102: 3578: 4080:

The statement about Navy WW-II aircraft is more restrictive than reality.

3282:

May the pic of the MV-22 be replaced with an actual USAF aircraft please?

902: 2309: 1985:

Swing and a miss. They will be part of the Air Force until approximately

636:? If not, what does it mean? I don't think CAP numbers belong here. -- 3596:. The aircraft, UAS, and weapons lists ones should be easy to follow. - 1000:

Those two flags are are personal flags of those two positions/people. --

379: 4378:

With no objection I've moved the Rapid Capabilities Office info to the

3495:. But it really belongs in the history page, not the actual root page. 3148: 2054:

whats the diff between and "official" nickname and a regular nickname?

51: 4429:

I don't really know how to do this, can you offer me any assistance?

2908:

Does anyone know if and how much of this agreement is still in effect?

2140:

Well, I'm about to start training on the T-43. I'll ask once I start.

3746: 3240:

Organizational structure and hierarchy of the United States Air Force

1451:

article, while allowing other uses of the template to default to use

1389:

isn't an infobox, but a collection of links to related articles. The

1224:

This article say that the SECAF "manages" the USAF, and why does the

4217:

Would a short note on the educational outreach programs be fitting?

3628:

I'm not entirely sure I like the layout of this chart, but it isn't

587:. I googled it and didn't get much. I think it should be changed to 4674:

http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/01/12/begging_off_command

3451: 101:

This roundel is used by all the armed forces of the United States.

3742: 3738: 2551:

This quote should be removed and has no business in this article.

2282: 2278: 2201:

the wordt violations of nuclearweaponsprocedures in several years.

1605:. A short summary with a link could be retained in this article. 409: 391: 2697:

United States Department of Defense aerospace vehicle designation

427: 385: 4806:

And now you're deleting on other issues that are Schwartz-free.

2936: 2912: 2623:

Coalition_combat_operations_in_Afghanistan_in_2008#United_States

1953:

Well intentioned (but somewhat flawed) editing, or POV pushing (

1370:

How about consolidating all of the data into a single info box?

455:

Do we really need two pictures of the F-15 in the image gallery?

4788:

does not become notable just because his name is part of it. --

4776:

notability justified the existence of his own article. A story

3477:

of Cold War aircraft on the AF's National Museum site though. -

3397:. So, reliable sourcing or not, it seems that until the event 3968:

above and seemingly forgotten. Maybe it won't be this time. -

3614:

also lists many of the smaller weapons employed by the USAF.--

3009: 945:

as separate things. I hope that isn't seen as excessive. --

3965: 2379:, but it could be covered more throroughly in the article. - 1343:

The problem with putting a different image at the top of the

434:

http://thefederalregister.com/b.p/agency/Air_Force_Department

4698: 3870:

http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/wm2699.cfm

373: 4595:. Other countries can have a Department of Defense, too. 2701:

1962 United States Tri-Service aircraft designation system

2261:

1962 United States Tri-Service aircraft designation system

1049:

I welcome further information on the matter. Thanks. --

975:

which has two flags, representing IMO two organizations. -

707:

1962 United States Tri-Service aircraft designation system

421: 3818:

The first paragraph and the Mission section both mention

3491:

I disagree - such a list would be a possible addition to

2956:—and the EC-47N for electronic reconnaissance during the 1039:

the USAF is an element of the Department of the Air Force

440:

http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/history/postwwii/nsa47.htm

4832:

isn't notable for that lack of name. Can you defend the

4699:

Air Force's core contributions reside in four main areas

2911:

i.e.- Could the Army build the two seat version of the

2285:. They are included on the list of aircraft. Reference: 1221:

in the USDAF article? Or in that and the SECAF article?

416:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1411636384

1698: 418:

United States Air Force: History and Guide to Resources

398:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/afb.htm

4704:

http://www.defense.gov//news/newsarticle.aspx?id=65397

4610:

In fact, with slight changes in spelling, there is a "

3580:. Does the U.S. Air force have an equivalent website? 1921:

I thought it already was.... (a sub-page, that is) -

296:

it costs thrice as much and is much less maneuverable.

4580:

South Africa, or any other English-speaking country.

3577:

was easy because i could use the us army's factfiles

3408:, it doesn't have too much of a place in Knowledge. 2835:

Should the F18 not be listed under fighter aircraft?

367: 290:

The only advantage the F22 has over the ET is stealth

4095:

So fix it, as you apparently know why it's wrong. -

1186:

http://www.au.af.mil/au/afhra/rso/organizations.html

832:

Mike - Regarding your edit summary for your edit of

404:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/usaf/

877:As far as Knowledge goes there are two issues here 520:http://www.airforce.com/careers/paychart/index.php 458:Are all of the pictures in this article necessary? 4614:" in Australia, Ieland, and South Africa, and a " 1076:Hate to ruin your fun here, but the Marine Corps 406:USAF organization and units by GlobalSecurity.org 308:with a detection range less than plain old radar. 2465:next time so you don't have to explain here... - 2216:Answered on his talk page. For those interested 2481:Asking for some help... Swiss Air Force history 2312:(F-21) was used for training, I believe. Some 1138:Works for me - thanks for suggesting this. -- 58:? I looks but didn't see one. Ah, found it at 4314:This section is a copy&paste from the RCO 3899:List of active United States military aircraft 2695:The designation system is described better at 1359:National Museum of the United States Air Force 1330:organization article has the seal at the top. 394:National Museum of the United States Air Force 3297:Done, but they may be a better image around. 400:U.S. military air bases by GlobalSecurity.org 8: 3242:; perhaps merge that article into this one? 3151:but i think it needs work and missed units. 2118:- for the popular name for the T-43 is says 1169:http://www.au.af.mil/au/afhra/rso/birth.html 752:As you might expect, I'd tend to agree with 4408:Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Chair force 1585:. Would anyone object to moving it there? 133:happened here, and hopefully, won't happen. 3154: 3122: 2860:No. This is an Air Force article and the 4912:CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( 4887: 4587:, where we need the article to be titled 4577:United States Department of the Air Force 3113: 1842:http://www.af.mil/bios/bio.asp?bioID=6545 1245:United States Department of the Air Force 834:United States Department of the Air Force 806:United States Department of the Air Force 4684:Does anybody have a ref to that letter? 4669:Refusing to be promoted from the cockpit 4058:Equipment of the United States Air Force 3569:Equipment of the United States Air Force 3473:so not in this article. You can find a 2363:That said, the short answer is: Through 2316:were acquired but eventually not used. - 1226:United States Secretary of the Air Force 143:Please see section of this page labeled 4880: 4583:The situation is just like that of the 4451:Cyberwarfare, and other phrasing issues 4054:Vehicles of the United States Air Force 4050:Aircraft of the United States Air Force 3911:Vehicles of the United States Air Force 2010:the f117 page says it is decomissioned 1821:That's how I recall seeing it, too. -- 1701:; it looks like potential vandalism. · 158:branch has its own area of expertise. ( 4902: 4891: 4826:just for including the name "Schwartz" 3493:History of the United States Air Force 436:Air Force News in The Federal Register 4535:You'd better spend some time to read 4406:This was discussed before in 2005 at 4052:, and redirected the now much shoter 3149:US Army#Combat maneuver organizations 2179:Hello! Could someone help me? On the 442:Text of the Act that created the USAF 380:http://www.airforcehistory.hq.af.mil/ 144: 7: 3822:. Is that legislation not enough? - 3052:Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force 1455:. Do you think that could work? -- 1407:at all, but they use, respectively, 531:Wow, thanks a lot, I appreciate it. 388:Air Force Historical Research Agency 4593:United States Department of Defense 4226:USAF Grooms Teenage Computer Geeks 3698:Equipment of the United States Navy 3575:Equipment of the United States Army 1721:Linkspam? Or a light hearted view? 609:Minimum Requirements for Enlistment 232:) should be placed on that phrase. 4537:Title 10 of the United States Code 4076:Statement about Navy WWII Aircraft 3539:I have re-added the C-47 as it is 2115:Just for info here is a 2004 list 1597:Break out uniform to a new article 1583:Air Education and Training Command 1453:Image:Seal of the US Air Force.svg 838:needs its own article, doesn't it? 709:, except for aircraft that have a 24: 4822:discuss what it is you want added 2886:Army "November 4, 1952" Air Force 2880:Army "November 4, 1952" Air Force 2030:, you can call and ask them. -- 4569:U.S. Department of the Air Force 1859:04:53, 10 July 2007 (UTC)agreed 1273:Organization and Hierarchy (T/D) 447:Is this article getting too big? 412:USAF Order of Battle at Scramble 3909:as U.S. Air Force aircraft but 3903:United States Air Force Academy 3549:6th Special Operations Squadron 2617:USAF units and Afghanistan 2008 1603:United States Air Force uniform 430:The Air Force Association (AFA) 410:http://www.scramble.nl/usaf.htm 392:http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/ 4748:15:07, 26 September 2011 (UTC) 4721:13:57, 26 September 2011 (UTC) 4616:Department of National Defence 4573:US Department of the Air Force 4553:15:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC) 4484:23:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC) 4191:That part was moved here from 3913:does not. Which should it be? 3440:20:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC) 2864:is a US Navy strike fighter. - 2691:(Portuguese Knowledge Member) 2488:History of the Swiss Air Force 2371:. For the long answer, ask at 856:than what you just wrote. -- 518:It depends on rank, look here 428:http://www.afa.org/default.asp 386:http://www.au.af.mil/au/afhra/ 1: 4511:They are not exactly the same 4090:03:08, 31 December 2009 (UTC) 3978:00:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC) 3939:22:09, 26 December 2009 (UTC) 3923:21:46, 26 December 2009 (UTC) 3889:15:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC) 3820:National Security Act of 1947 3762:08:09, 14 November 2009 (UTC) 3487:22:23, 14 February 2009 (UTC) 3464:21:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC) 3418:20:16, 3 September 2009 (UTC) 3388:19:35, 3 September 2009 (UTC) 3317:Where should LiMA be listed? 3137:22:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC) 3099:08:10, 13 February 2009 (UTC) 2926:06:40, 29 December 2008 (UTC) 2821:14:04, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 2807:08:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 2792:02:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 2778:02:11, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 2762:01:58, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 2699:(linked in this article) and 2475:23:51, 12 February 2008 (UTC) 2455:22:33, 12 February 2008 (UTC) 2410:14:46, 10 November 2008 (UTC) 2326:19:24, 29 December 2007 (UTC) 2300:17:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC) 2273:15:54, 29 December 2007 (UTC) 2254:14:17, 29 December 2007 (UTC) 2026:The F-117 is still flying at 1526:18:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC) 1511:05:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC) 1489:04:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC) 1460:05:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC) 1375:04:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC) 1366:03:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC) 1338:03:37, 19 February 2007 (UTC) 1296:23:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC) 1267:17:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC) 1257:03:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 1206:17:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC) 1192:15:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC) 1148:02:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC) 1132:09:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC) 1121:00:59, 17 February 2007 (UTC) 1111:05:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC) 1097:19:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC) 1088:16:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC) 1072:02:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 1059:01:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 1032:00:56, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 1005:05:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 980:02:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 955:01:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 911:01:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 893:00:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 866:00:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 822:03:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC) 779:15:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC) 761:01:03, 15 February 2007 (UTC) 748:20:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC) 735:18:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC) 718:17:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC) 701:17:18, 14 February 2007 (UTC) 474:title: "Awards and badges." 376:Official USAF Recruiting site 245:22:44, 20 February 2008 (UTC) 217:22:35, 20 February 2008 (UTC) 194:16:51, 20 February 2008 (UTC) 179:22:57, 19 December 2007 (UTC) 38:, especially a photo? Thanx 4876:22:38, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 4846:22:29, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 4816:22:22, 16 October 2011 (UTC) 4798:22:14, 14 October 2011 (UTC) 4770:01:16, 14 October 2011 (UTC) 4694:03:05, 17 January 2011 (UTC) 4140:19:53, 30 January 2010 (UTC) 4125:16:23, 30 January 2010 (UTC) 4070:18:59, 27 January 2010 (UTC) 3847:23:31, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 3832:15:24, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 3813:13:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC) 3793:15:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC) 3778:16:31, 2 December 2009 (UTC) 3732:21:55, 8 November 2009 (UTC) 3714:21:35, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 3685:15:02, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 3663:15:09, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 3646:14:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC) 3525:15:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC) 3503:07:40, 11 January 2010 (UTC) 3081:23:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC) 3046:21:23, 14 January 2009 (UTC) 3030:Thank You, carlp@voaky.org 3022:16:18, 13 January 2009 (UTC) 2998:04:19, 11 January 2009 (UTC) 2983:04:04, 11 January 2009 (UTC) 2874:15:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC) 2431:16:14, 17 January 2008 (UTC) 2233:20:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC) 2211:19:52, 20 October 2007 (UTC) 1697:Someone might want to check 1547:Suggestions for improvements 799:02:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC) 690:19:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC) 677:16:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC) 655:14:50, 7 February 2007 (UTC) 641:18:37, 13 January 2007 (UTC) 619:21:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC) 596:19:46, 2 November 2007 (UTC) 576:14:02, 29 October 2006 (UTC) 554:10:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC) 34:Can anyone add something to 18:Talk:United States Air Force 4830:lacking the name "Schwartz" 4565:Department of the Air Force 4193:First Friday (public event) 4105:04:24, 4 January 2010 (UTC) 4043:21:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC) 4024:04:46, 4 January 2010 (UTC) 4009:04:33, 4 January 2010 (UTC) 3964:This was brought up in the 3624:13:48, 9 October 2009 (UTC) 3606:17:53, 8 October 2009 (UTC) 3564:14:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC) 3369:02:42, 25 August 2009 (UTC) 2728:23:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC) 2713:20:57, 3 October 2008 (UTC) 2689:20:36, 3 October 2008 (UTC) 2635:11:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC) 2612:00:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC) 2389:17:28, 1 January 2008 (UTC) 2348:09:23, 1 January 2008 (UTC) 2153:06:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 2132:22:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC) 2109:23:38, 22 August 2007 (UTC) 2094:13:24, 17 August 2007 (UTC) 2084:06:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC) 2059:21:51, 16 August 2007 (UTC) 1628:The only thing I found was 1228:article say that the SECAF 632:". Does this refer to the 536:00:55, 16 August 2006 (UTC) 527:18:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC) 513:14:53, 15 August 2006 (UTC) 503:12:20, 15 August 2006 (UTC) 493:04:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC) 479:20:45, 12 August 2006 (UTC) 382:USAF History Support Office 120:13:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC) 4943: 4589:U.S. Department of Defense 4469:18:17, 15 March 2010 (UTC) 4289:19:08, 18 April 2010 (UTC) 4269:04:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC) 4253:03:30, 17 April 2010 (UTC) 4238:21:46, 10 April 2010 (UTC) 4205:20:55, 15 March 2010 (UTC) 4183:19:54, 15 March 2010 (UTC) 3216:OK, but "technically" CAP 3004:From Encarta Encyclopedia: 2884:I did a google search for 2175:On the Dutch language Wiki 1891:Insignia section EXPLODING 1745:06:35, 10 June 2007 (CST) 1559:22:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC) 1542:04:05, 15 March 2007 (UTC) 1355:Air Force Materiel Command 973:letter from SECAF and CSAF 840:, I believe the answer is 713:of G, J, N, X, Y or Z. -- 630:...and 57,000 auxiliarists 263:18:41, 13 March 2008 (UTC) 80:22:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC) 67:17:44, 26 April 2006 (UTC) 45:08:27, 26 April 2006 (UTC) 4664:07:12, 26 July 2010 (UTC) 4605:05:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC) 4559:Redirects to this article 4530:05:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC) 4309:14:07, 5 April 2010 (UTC) 4294:Rapid Capabilities Office 4167:09:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC) 3907:de Havilland Canada UV-18 3345:02:33, 31 July 2009 (UTC) 3330:22:44, 30 July 2009 (UTC) 3270:03:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC) 3252:19:26, 4 March 2009 (UTC) 3230:03:16, 5 March 2009 (UTC) 3208:16:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC) 3193:06:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC) 3169:02:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC) 3012:. This should be placed. 2591:20:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC) 2574:20:11, 14 July 2008 (UTC) 2539:04:56, 16 June 2008 (UTC) 2308:In the past, the Israeli 2035:06:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 2022:06:01, 19 July 2007 (UTC) 2004:06:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC) 1962:05:39, 16 July 2007 (UTC) 1937:17:23, 15 July 2007 (UTC) 1926:04:48, 14 July 2007 (UTC) 1913:19:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC) 1903:18:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC) 1886:05:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC) 1875:05:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC) 1864:05:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC) 1850:04:50, 10 July 2007 (UTC) 1826:05:08, 10 July 2007 (UTC) 1817:04:29, 10 July 2007 (UTC) 1799:04:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC) 1790:03:18, 10 July 2007 (UTC) 1779:02:52, 10 July 2007 (UTC) 1763:16:15, 10 June 2007 (UTC) 1243:It also didn't help that 424:Air Force Enlisted Forums 333:23:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC) 163:00:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC) 71:I put up a picture of my 4834:notability of your story 4506:16:02, 3 June 2010 (UTC) 4445:15:23, 11 May 2010 (UTC) 4424:11:16, 11 May 2010 (UTC) 4392:00:21, 18 May 2010 (UTC) 3798:Constitutional Authority 3374:Air Force Five Year Plan 3307:20:54, 1 June 2009 (UTC) 3292:20:30, 1 June 2009 (UTC) 3116:File:AirWay Marke-1-.jpg 3008:Re.: US Air Force, Re.: 2521:01:59, 6 June 2008 (UTC) 2502:20:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC) 1716:23:50, 23 May 2007 (UTC) 1688:20:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC) 1669:20:33, 20 May 2007 (UTC) 1652:22:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC) 1637:20:08, 18 May 2007 (UTC) 1620:20:04, 18 May 2007 (UTC) 1610:19:54, 18 May 2007 (UTC) 1592:18:24, 11 May 2007 (UTC) 353:01:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC) 152:00:28, 2 June 2006 (UTC) 138:23:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC) 125:Hmmm, what have we here? 4756:Schwartz is not notable 4369:22:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC) 4348:21:46, 4 May 2010 (UTC) 4328:21:23, 4 May 2010 (UTC) 2028:Holloman Air Force Base 1982:Please sign your posts. 1570:00:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC) 1449:United States Air Force 1427:, which are similar to 971:Furthermore, check out 903:the DoD offical website 846:United States Air Force 484:Advantages of Enlisted? 422:http://www.afforums.com 374:http://www.airforce.com 106:20:08, 4 May 2006 (UTC) 97:15:41, 4 May 2006 (UTC) 4901:Cite journal requires 3768:the B-2 belongs there. 2904: 2888:, and found out that- 601:Airman Battle Uniforms 4612:Department of Defence 4585:Department of Defense 3905:aircraft such as the 3058:William M. Fraser III 2950:Puff the Magic Dragon 2890: 1630:Airman Battle Uniform 1402:Infobox Military Unit 1291:Just wonderin'.... - 667:comment was added by 370:Official USAF website 4782:relating to Schwartz 4213:Educational outreach 2948:gunships—code named 2671:KC-135R Stratotanker 2196:Roughly translated: 1750:is appropriate, per 1397:articles do not use 804:Is the USAF and the 3445:Cold War Inventory? 2369:reverse engineering 1576:Core Values Section 4786:involving Schwartz 4489:USAF replaces NASA 3425:Wideawake Airfield 3406:historical context 2750:T. Michael Moseley 2738:T. Michael Moseley 2050:aircraft nicknames 1693:Possible vandalism 1412:United States Army 1395:United States Navy 1391:United States Army 368:http://www.af.mil/ 205:GlobalSecurity.org 4639: 4625:comment added by 4518:U.S. Armed Forces 4435:comment added by 4243:Air Force Colours 4157:comment added by 3966:Equipment section 3573:Factchecking for 3547:, Florida by the 3171: 3159:comment added by 3139: 3127:comment added by 3084: 3067:comment added by 3036:comment added by 2856: 2842:comment added by 2597:USAF Band Program 2576: 2564:comment added by 2457: 2441:comment added by 2345: 2251: 1679:Current inventory 1519:Turkish Air Force 1321: 1307:comment added by 1277:I'm working on a 680: 469:Awards and badges 30:Article expansion 4934: 4927: 4924: 4918: 4917: 4910: 4904: 4899: 4897: 4889: 4885: 4638: 4619: 4447: 4366: 4265: 4169: 4111:Split off JFACC? 3759: 3700:in the works on 3643: 3561: 3543:in use today at 3404:is notable in a 3399:actually happens 3395:already happened 3244:Fightin' Phillie 3175:Civil Air Patrol 3119: 3117: 3083: 3061: 3048: 3010:Project Bluebook 2900:Source/Link Here 2855: 2836: 2746:Michael W. Wynne 2734:Michael W. Wynne 2651:FUNCTIONS CODES 2559: 2436: 2416:AF Cyber Command 2377:F-14 Tomcat#Iran 2373:Talk:F-14 Tomcat 2343: 2339: 2297: 2249: 2245: 2239:Foreign aircraft 2230: 2150: 2101:USAF's factsheet 2082: 2080: 2002: 2000: 1714: 1685:Eurocopter tigre 1483: 1477: 1473: 1467: 1446: 1440: 1436: 1430: 1426: 1420: 1416: 1410: 1406: 1400: 1388: 1382: 1352: 1346: 1320: 1301: 1252: 1143: 1054: 950: 861: 817: 662: 634:Civil Air Patrol 242: 231: 225: 145:Citation Needed? 42: 4942: 4941: 4937: 4936: 4935: 4933: 4932: 4931: 4930: 4925: 4921: 4911: 4900: 4890: 4886: 4882: 4758: 4701: 4671: 4646: 4620: 4563:Since the term 4561: 4541:civilian agency 4513: 4491: 4453: 4430: 4399: 4358: 4296: 4277: 4263: 4245: 4215: 4152: 4148: 4113: 4078: 3896: 3864: 3862:Air sovereignty 3800: 3751: 3635: 3612:Airman Magazine 3594:USAF factsheets 3571: 3553: 3537: 3471:Not a directory 3447: 3428: 3376: 3353: 3315: 3280: 3177: 3145: 3115: 3107: 3101:Pavel Golikov. 3090: 3062: 3054: 3031: 3006: 2975:A new name 2008 2933: 2882: 2837: 2833: 2742: 2642: 2619: 2604:Virgil H. Soule 2599: 2549: 2483: 2418: 2365:cannibalization 2341: 2289: 2247: 2241: 2222: 2177: 2142: 2072: 2070: 2052: 1992: 1990: 1976: 1893: 1771: 1769:Displaying Rank 1723: 1702: 1695: 1681: 1599: 1578: 1549: 1534: 1503: 1481: 1475: 1471: 1465: 1444: 1438: 1434: 1428: 1424: 1418: 1414: 1408: 1404: 1398: 1386: 1380: 1350: 1344: 1327: 1302: 1275: 1248: 1214: 1156: 1139: 1050: 1021: 946: 857: 830: 813: 810: 791: 663:—The preceding 648: 646:Russian Planes? 626: 611: 603: 569: 561: 558: 546: 486: 471: 449: 360: 343: 234: 229: 223: 127: 90: 56:Air Force coins 40: 32: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 4940: 4938: 4929: 4928: 4919: 4879: 4853: 4852: 4851: 4850: 4849: 4848: 4838:OuroborosCobra 4801: 4800: 4790:OuroborosCobra 4778:about Schwartz 4757: 4754: 4753: 4752: 4751: 4750: 4740:OuroborosCobra 4736:Berlin Airlift 4700: 4697: 4682: 4681: 4670: 4667: 4645: 4642: 4641: 4640: 4560: 4557: 4556: 4555: 4512: 4509: 4490: 4487: 4452: 4449: 4427: 4426: 4398: 4395: 4376: 4375: 4374: 4373: 4372: 4371: 4295: 4292: 4276: 4275:Lead is crufty 4273: 4272: 4271: 4250:167.206.169.66 4244: 4241: 4214: 4211: 4210: 4209: 4208: 4207: 4186: 4185: 4147: 4144: 4143: 4142: 4112: 4109: 4108: 4107: 4077: 4074: 4073: 4072: 4031: 4030: 4029: 4028: 4027: 4026: 3993: 3992: 3991: 3990: 3983: 3982: 3981: 3980: 3959: 3958: 3957: 3956: 3942: 3941: 3895: 3892: 3878: 3877: 3863: 3860: 3859: 3858: 3857: 3856: 3850: 3849: 3834: 3799: 3796: 3765: 3764: 3719: 3718: 3717: 3716: 3690: 3689: 3688: 3687: 3670: 3669: 3668: 3667: 3666: 3665: 3608: 3570: 3567: 3545:Hurlburt Field 3536: 3533: 3532: 3531: 3530: 3529: 3528: 3527: 3508: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3446: 3443: 3427: 3422: 3421: 3420: 3375: 3372: 3357:A-37 Dragonfly 3352: 3349: 3348: 3347: 3314: 3311: 3310: 3309: 3279: 3276: 3275: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3255: 3254: 3235: 3234: 3233: 3232: 3211: 3210: 3176: 3173: 3161:72.241.225.215 3144: 3141: 3106: 3103: 3089: 3086: 3053: 3050: 3005: 3002: 3001: 3000: 2967: 2966: 2962: 2961: 2932: 2929: 2916: 2910: 2906: 2897: 2881: 2878: 2877: 2876: 2844:195.12.230.131 2832: 2829: 2828: 2827: 2826: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2780: 2741: 2731: 2716: 2715: 2663:MH-53 Pave Low 2641: 2638: 2618: 2615: 2598: 2595: 2594: 2593: 2548: 2545: 2544: 2543: 2542: 2541: 2524: 2523: 2482: 2479: 2478: 2477: 2417: 2414: 2413: 2412: 2396: 2395: 2394: 2393: 2392: 2391: 2361: 2353: 2352: 2351: 2350: 2335: 2329: 2328: 2305: 2304: 2303: 2302: 2240: 2237: 2236: 2235: 2203: 2202: 2194: 2193: 2181:Dutch language 2176: 2173: 2172: 2171: 2170: 2169: 2168: 2167: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2155: 2135: 2134: 2112: 2111: 2099:I checked the 2087: 2086: 2051: 2048: 2047: 2046: 2045: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2041: 2040: 2009: 2007: 2006: 1983: 1975: 1972: 1971: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1944: 1943: 1942: 1941: 1940: 1939: 1916: 1915: 1892: 1889: 1878: 1877: 1867: 1866: 1835: 1834: 1833: 1832: 1831: 1830: 1829: 1828: 1804: 1803: 1802: 1801: 1774:upside down? 1770: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1722: 1719: 1694: 1691: 1680: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1674: 1673: 1672: 1671: 1657: 1656: 1655: 1654: 1642: 1641: 1640: 1639: 1623: 1622: 1598: 1595: 1577: 1574: 1573: 1572: 1548: 1545: 1533: 1530: 1529: 1528: 1502: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1493: 1492: 1491: 1422:US Navy navbox 1326: 1323: 1309:78.168.127.191 1274: 1271: 1270: 1269: 1250:John Broughton 1237: 1236: 1233: 1222: 1213: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1197: 1196: 1195: 1194: 1179: 1178: 1174: 1173: 1172: 1171: 1162: 1161: 1155: 1152: 1151: 1150: 1141:John Broughton 1136: 1135: 1134: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1103: 1102: 1101: 1100: 1099: 1052:John Broughton 1047: 1046: 1020: 1019:Conversation 2 1017: 1016: 1015: 1014: 1013: 1012: 1011: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 989: 988: 987: 986: 985: 984: 983: 982: 962: 961: 960: 959: 958: 957: 948:John Broughton 937: 936: 935: 934: 933: 932: 916: 915: 914: 913: 896: 895: 884: 883: 879: 878: 874: 873: 859:John Broughton 829: 828:Conversation 1 826: 815:John Broughton 809: 802: 790: 789:Top of article 787: 786: 785: 784: 783: 782: 781: 771: 767: 766: 765: 764: 763: 682: 681: 647: 644: 625: 622: 610: 607: 602: 599: 568: 565: 560: 557: 545: 542: 541: 540: 539: 538: 506: 505: 485: 482: 470: 467: 465:Any thoughts? 463: 462: 459: 456: 448: 445: 444: 443: 437: 431: 425: 419: 413: 407: 401: 395: 389: 383: 377: 371: 359: 358:External Links 356: 342: 339: 338: 337: 336: 335: 317: 300: 293: 287: 280: 271: 270: 250: 249: 248: 247: 182: 181: 155: 154: 126: 123: 113: 112: 89: 86: 85: 84: 83: 82: 60:challenge coin 31: 28: 26: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 4939: 4926:Donald, p.358 4923: 4920: 4915: 4908: 4895: 4884: 4881: 4878: 4877: 4873: 4869: 4865: 4864: 4860: 4857: 4847: 4843: 4839: 4835: 4831: 4827: 4823: 4819: 4818: 4817: 4813: 4809: 4805: 4804: 4803: 4802: 4799: 4795: 4791: 4787: 4783: 4779: 4774: 4773: 4772: 4771: 4767: 4763: 4755: 4749: 4745: 4741: 4737: 4732: 4731:contributions 4728: 4724: 4723: 4722: 4718: 4714: 4710: 4709: 4708: 4705: 4696: 4695: 4691: 4687: 4678: 4677: 4676: 4675: 4668: 4666: 4665: 4661: 4657: 4656:69.146.33.239 4653: 4650: 4643: 4636: 4632: 4628: 4627:98.67.111.148 4624: 4618:" in Canada. 4617: 4613: 4609: 4608: 4607: 4606: 4602: 4598: 4597:98.67.111.148 4594: 4590: 4586: 4581: 4578: 4574: 4570: 4566: 4558: 4554: 4550: 4546: 4542: 4538: 4534: 4533: 4532: 4531: 4527: 4523: 4522:98.67.111.148 4519: 4510: 4508: 4507: 4503: 4499: 4494: 4488: 4486: 4485: 4481: 4477: 4476:74.103.30.251 4471: 4470: 4466: 4462: 4456: 4450: 4448: 4446: 4442: 4438: 4434: 4425: 4421: 4417: 4413: 4409: 4405: 4404: 4403: 4396: 4394: 4393: 4389: 4385: 4381: 4370: 4367: 4365: 4363: 4355: 4351: 4350: 4349: 4345: 4341: 4336: 4331: 4330: 4329: 4325: 4321: 4317: 4313: 4312: 4311: 4310: 4306: 4302: 4293: 4291: 4290: 4286: 4282: 4274: 4270: 4267: 4266: 4260: 4257: 4256: 4255: 4254: 4251: 4242: 4240: 4239: 4235: 4231: 4227: 4225: 4221: 4220:For example: 4218: 4212: 4206: 4202: 4198: 4194: 4190: 4189: 4188: 4187: 4184: 4180: 4176: 4172: 4171: 4170: 4168: 4164: 4160: 4156: 4145: 4141: 4137: 4133: 4129: 4128: 4127: 4126: 4122: 4118: 4110: 4106: 4102: 4098: 4094: 4093: 4092: 4091: 4087: 4083: 4075: 4071: 4067: 4063: 4059: 4055: 4051: 4047: 4046: 4045: 4044: 4040: 4036: 4025: 4021: 4017: 4012: 4011: 4010: 4006: 4002: 3997: 3996: 3995: 3994: 3987: 3986: 3985: 3984: 3979: 3975: 3971: 3967: 3963: 3962: 3961: 3960: 3954: 3950: 3946: 3945: 3944: 3943: 3940: 3936: 3932: 3927: 3926: 3925: 3924: 3920: 3916: 3912: 3908: 3904: 3900: 3893: 3891: 3890: 3886: 3882: 3874: 3873: 3872: 3871: 3867: 3861: 3854: 3853: 3852: 3851: 3848: 3844: 3840: 3835: 3833: 3829: 3825: 3821: 3817: 3816: 3815: 3814: 3810: 3806: 3797: 3795: 3794: 3790: 3786: 3780: 3779: 3775: 3771: 3763: 3760: 3758: 3756: 3748: 3744: 3740: 3736: 3735: 3734: 3733: 3729: 3725: 3724:Redjacket3827 3715: 3711: 3707: 3703: 3699: 3694: 3693: 3692: 3691: 3686: 3682: 3678: 3674: 3673: 3672: 3671: 3664: 3660: 3656: 3652: 3649: 3648: 3647: 3644: 3642: 3640: 3631: 3627: 3626: 3625: 3621: 3617: 3613: 3609: 3607: 3603: 3599: 3595: 3591: 3590: 3589: 3587: 3583: 3579: 3576: 3568: 3566: 3565: 3562: 3560: 3558: 3550: 3546: 3542: 3534: 3526: 3522: 3518: 3514: 3513: 3512: 3511: 3510: 3509: 3504: 3501: 3498: 3494: 3490: 3489: 3488: 3484: 3480: 3476: 3472: 3469:Knowledge is 3468: 3467: 3466: 3465: 3461: 3457: 3453: 3444: 3442: 3441: 3437: 3433: 3426: 3423: 3419: 3415: 3411: 3410:QueenofBattle 3407: 3403: 3400: 3396: 3392: 3391: 3390: 3389: 3385: 3381: 3373: 3371: 3370: 3366: 3362: 3358: 3350: 3346: 3342: 3338: 3334: 3333: 3332: 3331: 3327: 3323: 3320: 3312: 3308: 3304: 3300: 3296: 3295: 3294: 3293: 3289: 3285: 3277: 3271: 3267: 3263: 3260:Good point. 3259: 3258: 3257: 3256: 3253: 3249: 3245: 3241: 3237: 3236: 3231: 3227: 3223: 3219: 3215: 3214: 3213: 3212: 3209: 3205: 3201: 3197: 3196: 3195: 3194: 3190: 3186: 3182: 3174: 3172: 3170: 3166: 3162: 3158: 3152: 3150: 3142: 3140: 3138: 3134: 3130: 3126: 3120: 3118: 3111: 3104: 3102: 3100: 3096: 3087: 3085: 3082: 3078: 3074: 3070: 3066: 3059: 3051: 3049: 3047: 3043: 3039: 3035: 3028: 3024: 3023: 3019: 3015: 3011: 3003: 2999: 2995: 2991: 2987: 2986: 2985: 2984: 2980: 2976: 2970: 2964: 2963: 2959: 2955: 2951: 2947: 2943: 2942: 2941: 2938: 2930: 2928: 2927: 2923: 2919: 2914: 2909: 2903: 2901: 2895: 2894: 2889: 2887: 2879: 2875: 2871: 2867: 2863: 2862:F/A-18 Hornet 2859: 2858: 2857: 2853: 2849: 2845: 2841: 2831:F-18 Missing? 2830: 2822: 2818: 2814: 2810: 2809: 2808: 2804: 2800: 2795: 2794: 2793: 2789: 2785: 2781: 2779: 2775: 2771: 2766: 2765: 2764: 2763: 2759: 2755: 2751: 2747: 2739: 2735: 2732: 2730: 2729: 2725: 2721: 2714: 2710: 2706: 2702: 2698: 2694: 2693: 2692: 2690: 2686: 2682: 2677: 2674: 2672: 2668: 2667:Boeing RC-135 2664: 2661:Example: The 2659: 2656: 2652: 2649: 2645: 2639: 2637: 2636: 2632: 2628: 2624: 2616: 2614: 2613: 2609: 2605: 2596: 2592: 2588: 2584: 2579: 2578: 2577: 2575: 2571: 2567: 2566:69.26.236.226 2563: 2556: 2552: 2547:Please Remove 2546: 2540: 2536: 2532: 2528: 2527: 2526: 2525: 2522: 2518: 2514: 2510: 2506: 2505: 2504: 2503: 2499: 2495: 2491: 2489: 2480: 2476: 2472: 2468: 2464: 2460: 2459: 2458: 2456: 2452: 2448: 2444: 2440: 2433: 2432: 2428: 2424: 2415: 2411: 2407: 2403: 2398: 2397: 2390: 2386: 2382: 2378: 2374: 2370: 2366: 2362: 2359: 2358: 2357: 2356: 2355: 2354: 2349: 2346: 2344: 2336: 2333: 2332: 2331: 2330: 2327: 2323: 2319: 2315: 2311: 2307: 2306: 2301: 2298: 2296: 2294: 2287: 2284: 2280: 2276: 2275: 2274: 2270: 2266: 2262: 2258: 2257: 2256: 2255: 2252: 2250: 2238: 2234: 2231: 2229: 2227: 2219: 2215: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2209: 2199: 2198: 2197: 2190: 2189: 2188: 2186: 2182: 2174: 2164: 2163: 2162: 2161: 2160: 2159: 2154: 2151: 2149: 2147: 2139: 2138: 2137: 2136: 2133: 2129: 2125: 2121: 2117: 2114: 2113: 2110: 2107: 2102: 2098: 2097: 2096: 2095: 2092: 2085: 2081: 2079: 2077: 2067: 2063: 2062: 2061: 2060: 2057: 2049: 2038: 2037: 2036: 2033: 2029: 2025: 2024: 2023: 2020: 2015: 2014: 2013: 2012: 2011: 2005: 2001: 1999: 1997: 1988: 1984: 1981: 1980: 1979: 1973: 1963: 1960: 1956: 1952: 1951: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1945: 1938: 1935: 1934: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1924: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1914: 1911: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1901: 1900: 1890: 1888: 1887: 1884: 1876: 1873: 1869: 1868: 1865: 1862: 1858: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1848: 1843: 1839: 1827: 1824: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1815: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1807: 1806: 1805: 1800: 1797: 1793: 1792: 1791: 1788: 1783: 1782: 1781: 1780: 1777: 1768: 1764: 1761: 1757: 1753: 1748: 1747: 1746: 1744: 1739: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1720: 1718: 1717: 1713: 1712: 1709: 1706: 1700: 1692: 1690: 1689: 1686: 1678: 1670: 1667: 1663: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1658: 1653: 1650: 1646: 1645: 1644: 1643: 1638: 1635: 1631: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1621: 1618: 1614: 1613: 1612: 1611: 1608: 1604: 1596: 1594: 1593: 1590: 1589: 1584: 1575: 1571: 1568: 1563: 1562: 1561: 1560: 1557: 1556: 1546: 1544: 1543: 1540: 1531: 1527: 1524: 1520: 1515: 1514: 1513: 1512: 1509: 1500: 1490: 1487: 1480: 1470: 1463: 1462: 1461: 1458: 1454: 1450: 1443: 1433: 1423: 1413: 1403: 1396: 1392: 1385: 1378: 1377: 1376: 1373: 1369: 1368: 1367: 1364: 1360: 1356: 1349: 1342: 1341: 1340: 1339: 1336: 1331: 1324: 1322: 1318: 1314: 1310: 1306: 1298: 1297: 1294: 1289: 1286: 1284: 1280: 1272: 1268: 1265: 1261: 1260: 1259: 1258: 1255: 1251: 1246: 1241: 1234: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1220: 1216: 1215: 1211: 1207: 1204: 1199: 1198: 1193: 1190: 1187: 1183: 1182: 1181: 1180: 1176: 1175: 1170: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1163: 1158: 1157: 1154:USDAF vs USAF 1153: 1149: 1146: 1142: 1137: 1133: 1130: 1126: 1122: 1119: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1109: 1104: 1098: 1095: 1091: 1090: 1089: 1086: 1081: 1080: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1070: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1057: 1053: 1044: 1040: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1030: 1025: 1018: 1006: 1003: 999: 998: 997: 996: 995: 994: 993: 992: 991: 990: 981: 978: 974: 970: 969: 968: 967: 966: 965: 964: 963: 956: 953: 949: 943: 942: 941: 940: 939: 938: 930: 926: 922: 921: 920: 919: 918: 917: 912: 909: 904: 901:According to 900: 899: 898: 897: 894: 891: 886: 885: 881: 880: 876: 875: 870: 869: 868: 867: 864: 860: 854: 849: 847: 843: 839: 835: 827: 825: 823: 820: 816: 807: 803: 801: 800: 797: 788: 780: 777: 772: 768: 762: 759: 755: 751: 750: 749: 746: 742: 738: 737: 736: 733: 730: 729:status prefix 725: 721: 720: 719: 716: 712: 711:status prefix 708: 704: 703: 702: 699: 694: 693: 692: 691: 688: 678: 674: 670: 669:131.17.129.22 666: 659: 658: 657: 656: 653: 645: 643: 642: 639: 635: 631: 624:auxiliarists? 623: 621: 620: 617: 608: 606: 600: 598: 597: 594: 590: 586: 582: 578: 577: 574: 567:"Un Ab Alto"? 566: 564: 556: 555: 552: 543: 537: 534: 530: 529: 528: 525: 521: 517: 516: 515: 514: 511: 504: 501: 497: 496: 495: 494: 491: 483: 481: 480: 477: 468: 466: 460: 457: 454: 453: 452: 446: 441: 438: 435: 432: 429: 426: 423: 420: 417: 414: 411: 408: 405: 402: 399: 396: 393: 390: 387: 384: 381: 378: 375: 372: 369: 366: 365: 364: 357: 355: 354: 351: 347: 340: 334: 330: 326: 321: 318: 314: 309: 304: 301: 297: 294: 291: 288: 284: 281: 278: 275: 274: 273: 272: 267: 266: 265: 264: 260: 256: 255:213.78.183.91 246: 243: 241: 239: 228: 220: 219: 218: 214: 210: 206: 202: 198: 197: 196: 195: 191: 187: 186:213.78.183.91 180: 176: 172: 168: 167: 166: 164: 161: 153: 150: 146: 142: 141: 140: 139: 136: 130: 124: 122: 121: 118: 110: 109: 108: 107: 104: 99: 98: 95: 87: 81: 78: 74: 73:Airman's coin 70: 69: 68: 65: 61: 57: 53: 49: 48: 47: 46: 43: 37: 29: 27: 19: 4922: 4894:cite journal 4883: 4866: 4861: 4858: 4854: 4833: 4829: 4825: 4821: 4785: 4781: 4777: 4759: 4730: 4726: 4702: 4683: 4672: 4654: 4651: 4647: 4582: 4562: 4540: 4514: 4495: 4492: 4472: 4457: 4454: 4437:132.25.0.210 4428: 4400: 4377: 4361: 4359: 4353: 4297: 4278: 4262: 4246: 4228: 4222: 4219: 4216: 4159:132.25.0.206 4149: 4146:First Friday 4114: 4079: 4032: 3901:is treating 3897: 3879: 3868: 3865: 3801: 3781: 3766: 3754: 3752: 3720: 3702:my userspace 3697: 3650: 3638: 3636: 3629: 3572: 3556: 3554: 3540: 3538: 3456:69.67.117.34 3448: 3429: 3401: 3394: 3377: 3354: 3316: 3281: 3217: 3178: 3155:— Preceding 3153: 3146: 3123:— Preceding 3121: 3112: 3108: 3091: 3055: 3029: 3025: 3007: 2971: 2968: 2953: 2949: 2934: 2907: 2905: 2896: 2892: 2891: 2885: 2883: 2834: 2743: 2720:Daniel Souza 2717: 2681:Daniel Souza 2678: 2675: 2660: 2657: 2653: 2650: 2646: 2643: 2620: 2600: 2557: 2553: 2550: 2507: 2485: 2484: 2463:edit summary 2434: 2419: 2340: 2292: 2290: 2246: 2242: 2225: 2223: 2204: 2195: 2184: 2178: 2145: 2143: 2119: 2088: 2075: 2073: 2053: 2008: 1995: 1993: 1977: 1954: 1932: 1898: 1894: 1879: 1845:promotions. 1840: 1836: 1772: 1751: 1740: 1736: 1732: 1728: 1724: 1710: 1707: 1704: 1696: 1682: 1600: 1587: 1579: 1554: 1550: 1535: 1532:Shorten lead 1504: 1484:altogether. 1332: 1328: 1299: 1290: 1287: 1276: 1242: 1238: 1229: 1218: 1078: 1077: 1048: 1042: 1038: 1022: 928: 924: 852: 850: 841: 837: 831: 811: 792: 740: 723: 683: 649: 629: 627: 612: 604: 589:mors ab alto 588: 584: 581:Mors ab alto 580: 579: 570: 562: 547: 507: 487: 476:Jack Bethune 472: 464: 450: 361: 348: 344: 325:72.76.238.48 319: 312: 307: 302: 295: 289: 282: 276: 251: 237: 235: 183: 156: 131: 128: 117:Jonrose28782 114: 100: 91: 88:USAF Roundel 33: 25: 4680:considered. 4621:—Preceding 4431:—Preceding 4416:MilborneOne 4397:Chair Force 4299:Thoughts?-- 4175:MilborneOne 4153:—Preceding 4014:articles.-- 3949:MilborneOne 3299:MilborneOne 3129:164.77.50.5 3105:I need help 3063:—Preceding 3032:—Preceding 2958:Vietnam War 2838:—Preceding 2644:TYPE CODES 2560:—Preceding 2461:Provide an 2437:—Preceding 2423:Gawain VIII 2124:MilborneOne 1959:NDCompuGeek 1923:NDCompuGeek 1303:—Preceding 1293:NDCompuGeek 1279:new article 844:, that the 741:operational 341:PT Uniforms 4828:, a story 4035:username 1 3915:username 1 3785:username 1 3706:username 1 3582:username 1 3497:Buckshot06 3432:Parker1297 3038:69.64.4.74 3014:Powerzilla 2640:USAF CODES 2531:Reedmalloy 2513:Reedmalloy 2342:A M M A R 2248:A M M A R 2208:Soetermans 1933:johnpseudo 1908:Concur. - 1899:johnpseudo 1857:DJREJECTED 1796:DJREJECTED 1743:CyberNigma 1588:johnpseudo 1555:johnpseudo 1325:Info boxes 1283:User:Tdrss 977:Mikedelsol 908:Mikedelsol 890:Mikedelsol 593:Rwflammang 585:un ab alto 4903:|journal= 4380:Air Staff 4335:Air Staff 4320:Enemenemu 4316:factsheet 4264:SCΛRECROW 3989:procured. 3592:Yes, see 3351:PAVE COIN 3069:Musicool2 2494:Keimzelle 2218:read this 2106:TomKat222 1699:this edit 1666:Greenshed 1649:Greenshed 1607:Greenshed 1212:Questions 1024:This link 808:the same? 774:included. 758:Wootonius 687:Wootonius 652:Wootonius 350:El Cubano 313:secondary 4635:contribs 4623:unsigned 4461:DesScorp 4433:unsigned 4338:Force.-- 4197:Fnlayson 4155:unsigned 3970:Fnlayson 3894:Aircraft 3837:Force.-- 3824:Fnlayson 3677:Fnlayson 3598:Fnlayson 3517:Fnlayson 3479:Fnlayson 3262:Newguy34 3222:Newguy34 3185:Newguy34 3157:unsigned 3125:unsigned 3088:largest? 3077:contribs 3065:unsigned 3034:unsigned 2990:Fnlayson 2866:Fnlayson 2852:contribs 2840:unsigned 2813:Fnlayson 2784:Fnlayson 2770:Fnlayson 2718:Okay! -- 2705:Fnlayson 2583:Fnlayson 2562:unsigned 2467:Fnlayson 2451:contribs 2439:unsigned 2318:Fnlayson 2310:IAI Kfir 2281:and the 1501:Clean Up 1317:contribs 1305:unsigned 927:to mean 665:unsigned 573:AnonMoos 533:Jamesino 524:Sir hugo 510:Jamesino 500:Sir hugo 490:Jamesino 171:Tonerman 135:Jlujan69 4856:topic? 4727:purpose 4384:Ndunruh 4382:page.-- 4362:BQZip01 4340:Ndunruh 4301:Ndunruh 4132:Ndunruh 4016:Ndunruh 3839:Ndunruh 3755:BQZip01 3655:Ndunruh 3639:BQZip01 3616:Ndunruh 3557:BQZip01 3337:Ndunruh 3200:Ndunruh 2799:Neovu79 2754:Neovu79 2627:Chwyatt 2625:Cheers 2529:Done.-- 2443:Amb8819 2402:Chwyatt 2314:MiG-29s 2293:BQZip01 2226:BQZip01 2146:BQZip01 2091:Robkehr 2076:BQZip01 2056:Robkehr 2032:GoDawgs 1996:BQZip01 1883:Robkehr 1872:ElKevbo 1861:Robkehr 1847:Robkehr 1823:ElKevbo 1787:ElKevbo 1776:Robkehr 1539:ElKevbo 1508:BQZip01 1486:Bburton 1372:Bburton 1335:Bburton 1264:BQZip01 1203:BQZip01 1189:BQZip01 1129:BQZip01 1108:BQZip01 1085:BQZip01 851:If you 796:Robin63 776:BQZip01 732:BQZip01 698:BQZip01 238:BQZip01 160:NucPhy7 77:Bburton 52:coining 4575:, and 4545:RicJac 4412:WP:RFD 4097:BilCat 4062:BilCat 4001:BilCat 3931:BilCat 3770:Jpal55 3747:OC-135 3651:Concur 3500:(talk) 2954:Spooky 2740:firing 2509:edits. 2492::-) -- 2381:BillCJ 2265:rogerd 2185:single 2019:BillCJ 1910:BillCJ 1814:BillCJ 1760:BillCJ 1708:ndonic 1634:BillCJ 1617:BillCJ 1567:BillCJ 1457:rogerd 1379:Well, 1363:rogerd 1118:Ntmg05 1094:Ntmg05 1069:Ntmg05 1029:Ntmg05 1002:Pmsyyz 754:rogerd 745:rogerd 715:rogerd 638:rogerd 616:Just H 209:rogerd 201:Jane's 149:rogerd 64:Pmsyyz 4868:Hcobb 4808:Hcobb 4762:Hcobb 4713:Hcobb 4686:Hcobb 4498:Hcobb 4281:Hcobb 4230:Hcobb 4117:Hcobb 4082:Hcobb 3881:Hcobb 3805:AlanK 3743:YAL-1 3739:C-47T 3541:still 3380:Hcobb 3361:Hcobb 3322:Hcobb 3284:Hcobb 3278:MV-22 3143:Hello 2946:AC-47 2918:LP-mn 2283:An-26 2279:Mi-17 2166:(UTC) 1974:F-117 1756:WP:EL 1754:from 1361:. -- 1357:, or 1127:Do it 559:ABU's 551:ELH50 269:(UTC) 54:" or 41:Joe I 16:< 4914:link 4907:help 4872:talk 4842:talk 4836:? -- 4812:talk 4794:talk 4766:talk 4744:talk 4738:. -- 4717:talk 4690:talk 4660:talk 4631:talk 4601:talk 4549:talk 4526:talk 4502:talk 4480:talk 4465:talk 4441:talk 4420:talk 4388:talk 4354:need 4344:talk 4324:talk 4318:. -- 4305:talk 4285:talk 4234:talk 4201:talk 4179:talk 4163:talk 4136:talk 4121:talk 4101:talk 4086:talk 4066:talk 4039:talk 4020:talk 4005:talk 3974:talk 3953:talk 3935:talk 3919:talk 3885:talk 3843:talk 3828:talk 3809:talk 3789:talk 3774:talk 3728:talk 3710:talk 3681:talk 3659:talk 3620:talk 3610:The 3602:talk 3586:talk 3535:C-47 3521:talk 3483:talk 3475:list 3460:talk 3452:here 3436:talk 3414:talk 3384:talk 3365:talk 3341:talk 3326:talk 3313:LiMA 3303:talk 3288:talk 3266:talk 3248:talk 3226:talk 3204:talk 3189:talk 3183:)? 3181:here 3165:talk 3133:talk 3095:talk 3073:talk 3042:talk 3018:talk 2994:talk 2979:talk 2937:C-47 2935:The 2931:C-47 2922:talk 2913:A-10 2870:talk 2848:talk 2817:talk 2803:talk 2788:talk 2774:talk 2758:talk 2748:and 2736:and 2724:talk 2709:talk 2685:talk 2631:talk 2608:talk 2587:talk 2570:talk 2535:talk 2517:talk 2498:talk 2471:talk 2447:talk 2427:talk 2406:talk 2385:talk 2367:and 2322:talk 2269:talk 2128:talk 2120:None 2066:T-37 1987:2008 1523:C.J. 1479:USAF 1469:USAF 1442:USAF 1432:USAF 1417:and 1393:and 1384:USAF 1348:USAF 1313:talk 1254:(♫♫) 1219:only 1145:(♫♫) 1056:(♫♫) 952:(♫♫) 863:(♫♫) 819:(♫♫) 673:talk 544:DRUs 329:talk 259:talk 227:fact 213:talk 190:talk 175:talk 103:Muj0 94:Simm 62:. -- 36:this 4784:or 4780:or 4644:CAP 4591:or 4056:to 3630:too 3402:and 3359:. 3060:? 2952:or 2915:??? 1177:and 1043:not 724:not 203:or 4898:: 4896:}} 4892:{{ 4874:) 4844:) 4814:) 4796:) 4768:) 4746:) 4719:) 4692:) 4662:) 4637:) 4633:• 4603:) 4571:, 4551:) 4528:) 4504:) 4482:) 4474:-- 4467:) 4443:) 4422:) 4414:. 4390:) 4360:— 4346:) 4326:) 4307:) 4287:) 4236:) 4203:) 4181:) 4165:) 4138:) 4123:) 4103:) 4088:) 4068:) 4041:) 4022:) 4007:) 3976:) 3937:) 3921:) 3887:) 3845:) 3830:) 3811:) 3791:) 3776:) 3753:— 3745:, 3741:, 3730:) 3712:) 3683:) 3661:) 3637:— 3622:) 3604:) 3588:) 3555:— 3523:) 3485:) 3462:) 3438:) 3416:) 3386:) 3367:) 3343:) 3328:) 3305:) 3290:) 3268:) 3250:) 3228:) 3218:is 3206:) 3191:) 3167:) 3135:) 3097:) 3079:) 3075:• 3044:) 3020:) 2996:) 2981:) 2924:) 2872:) 2854:) 2850:• 2819:) 2805:) 2790:) 2776:) 2760:) 2752:. 2726:) 2711:) 2687:) 2679:-- 2633:) 2610:) 2589:) 2572:) 2537:) 2519:) 2511:-- 2500:) 2473:) 2453:) 2449:• 2429:) 2408:) 2387:) 2324:) 2291:— 2271:) 2224:— 2220:. 2206:-- 2144:— 2130:) 2122:. 2074:— 1994:— 1989:. 1785:-- 1741:- 1537:-- 1482:}} 1476:{{ 1472:}} 1466:{{ 1445:}} 1439:{{ 1435:}} 1429:{{ 1425:}} 1419:{{ 1415:}} 1409:{{ 1405:}} 1399:{{ 1387:}} 1381:{{ 1351:}} 1345:{{ 1319:) 1315:• 1083:4. 1079:is 1027:-- 853:do 842:no 836:- 824:) 794:-- 675:) 591:. 331:) 261:) 236:— 230:}} 224:{{ 215:) 192:) 177:) 165:) 147:-- 4916:) 4909:) 4905:( 4870:( 4840:( 4810:( 4792:( 4764:( 4742:( 4715:( 4688:( 4658:( 4629:( 4599:( 4547:( 4524:( 4500:( 4478:( 4463:( 4439:( 4418:( 4386:( 4364:— 4342:( 4322:( 4303:( 4283:( 4232:( 4199:( 4177:( 4161:( 4134:( 4119:( 4099:( 4084:( 4064:( 4037:( 4018:( 4003:( 3972:( 3955:) 3951:( 3933:( 3917:( 3883:( 3841:( 3826:( 3807:( 3787:( 3772:( 3757:— 3726:( 3708:( 3679:( 3657:( 3641:— 3618:( 3600:( 3584:( 3559:— 3519:( 3481:( 3458:( 3434:( 3412:( 3382:( 3363:( 3339:( 3324:( 3301:( 3286:( 3264:( 3246:( 3224:( 3202:( 3187:( 3163:( 3131:( 3093:( 3071:( 3040:( 3016:( 2992:( 2977:( 2960:. 2920:( 2902:) 2898:( 2868:( 2846:( 2815:( 2801:( 2786:( 2772:( 2768:- 2756:( 2722:( 2707:( 2683:( 2629:( 2606:( 2585:( 2581:- 2568:( 2533:( 2515:( 2496:( 2469:( 2445:( 2425:( 2404:( 2383:( 2320:( 2295:— 2267:( 2228:— 2148:— 2126:( 2078:— 1998:— 1711:O 1705:A 1311:( 931:. 906:- 888:- 679:. 671:( 522:. 327:( 257:( 240:— 211:( 188:( 173:(

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index